Trump The Timid

[Trigger warning–more Trump derangement syndrome.]

I don’t think I’ve ever seen such a timid man run for President.  Consider:

1.   Trump wants to ban Muslim immigrants: “Until we are able to determine and understand this problem”

Why doesn’t he understand the problem?  Isn’t it obvious?  If he doesn’t know what’s going on, why is he running for President?

2.  Here’s Time magazine:

Republican presidential frontrunner Donald Trump told TIME that he does not know whether he would have supported or opposed the internment of Japanese Americans during World War II.

“I would have had to be there at the time to tell you, to give you a proper answer,”

You don’t know?  You’d have to be there?

3.  Here’s CNNPolitics:

The Sunday uproar started when Trump was asked by Tapper whether he would disavow Duke and other white supremacist groups that are supporting his campaign.

“Just so you understand, I don’t know anything about David Duke, OK?” Trump said.

Trump was pressed three times on whether he’d distance himself from the Ku Klux Klan — but never mentioned the group in his answers.

“I don’t know anything about what you’re even talking about with white supremacy or white supremacists,” he said. “So I don’t know. I don’t know — did he endorse me, or what’s going on? Because I know nothing about David Duke; I know nothing about white supremacists.”

He knows nothing about David Duke and white supremacists?  Come on, just tell us what you think!

Seriously, Trump is of course anything but timid.  Which means that when he seems timid and tentative, something entirely different is actually going on.

Here’s what Trump might be thinking;  “I won’t disavow or not disavow David Duke.  That way I can send a dog whistle to those southern rednecks I need on Tuesday, while still denying it later on.”  Or “I’ll play both sides of the issue on concentration camps for Americans of Japanese descent, so that I can later deny it.  I’ll just say it’s a difficult issue; who knows what I would have done.”  Or “I’ll say we need to ban Muslims until we know more.  That will get me the anti-Muslim bigots, while still leaving me an out if there’s a big backlash.”  Trust me, Trump knows exactly what he believes—the apparent timidity is all part of the act.

BTW, Trump’s biggest support today came from that well known southern redneck state called “Massachusetts”.  In contrast, he didn’t do well in ultra-liberal states like Oklahoma.  Sanders lost in the People’s Republic of Massachusetts, and won in Oklahoma.  I used to think I understood America, but I have no idea what’s going on.  It like the news media mixed up the election map into a sort of Picasso cubist painting.

Kudos to the 6 New Jersey newspapers that called on Gov. Christie to resign.  It’s a moment of truth where the GOP must decide if it wants to turn into an American version of France’s National Front.  Pity that Rubio fell 3 points short in Virginia, otherwise the story might have been that the race is still wide open.  As it is, Trump still has the momentum.  On the other hand those who think Trump will win a general election might ponder the fact that he underperformed the poll numbers tonight, and the polls already had him doing 8 points worse than Rubio, in a match-up against Hillary.

PS.  I’d been interested the total number of votes earned by Trump, Cruz and Rubio today. My sense is that while Trump had more than Cruz, it’s wasn’t by the margin people expected going in.  Is that correct?

 


Tags:

 
 
 

201 Responses to “Trump The Timid”

  1. Gravatar of CA CA
    1. March 2016 at 20:56

    I’m a moderate Republican and I’m kinda hoping that this entire mess results in the dissolution of the Republican party. We can do a lot better than this. Center-right Americans need to form a new party.

  2. Gravatar of zephito zephito
    1. March 2016 at 21:07

    Bad news for the Anti-Trump crowd: the wrong person (Cruz) was the one who over-performed. Cruz has no real path to the nomination but his somewhat rejuvenated presence will surely hurt Rubio in Ohio and Florida. Had he been blown out tonight it might have made it easier for Rubio to be competitive in those winner-take-all states.

    Trump underperformed in VA but did a little better than his polls in GA and MA.

    Does anyone else think that Trump is as surprised as we are at his success? He could be such an egomaniac that he expected to win from the get go, but part of me thinks this was all just a stunt on his part for some new tv show or project or something. I don’t think he has the first clue about what he wants to do or how he’s going to do it should he actually win. I could be wrong about this but his campaign has just been so bizarre.

  3. Gravatar of Morgan Warstler Morgan Warstler
    1. March 2016 at 21:15

    You are amazing.

    You TOTALLY GET HOW TRUIMP THINKS.

    But then, pretend Central Bankers, Celebrities, ALL Politicians, most academics, ALL Journalists, and on and on and on….

    they don’t think like Trump! They are NOBLE!

    See you think the game is Democracy! and everyone speaks and ay things and blah blah…

    That’s not what this is… this is scripting a reality TV show that generates RATINGS, that sucks up all the oxygen in the room, so that nobody can talk about anything else the than the hit TV show.

    AND SCOTT – YOOOHOOOO Scott!

    The reason is HAS TO BE A REALITY TV SHOW is because it is competing against ANOTHER REALITY SHOW called Mainstream Media, and while you know in every fiber of your being it is JUST A SHOW…

    You have convinced yourself there is some normative truth and goodness in the one all around you all day….

    And that’s silly.

    We don’t know it for sure, but in order to grab the bat of govt and beat the left to death with their own invention… perhaps, it takes what Trump is doing.

    Hey better ya’ll cal me a racist, bc I don’t want to talk abut YOUR THING, and i have a built in out… hey Farrakhan is endorsing trump…. And when he and David Duke shake hands in common league against immigrants – well how can that be racist? that’s healing! Shirley, using Democracy to limit newcomers is more moral than using it to steal people’s sh*t!

    And on, and on, and on…

    Maybe this crazy, maybe this is what it takes to be able to build a whole new basket of rents and the coalition who gets to have them.

    And it must be something! Because MSNBC is shedding their SJW / BLM programming and appears to be mounting a play for this new Trump Coalition.

    Ideology weirds me out. Because any given basket of rents can tell a moral reasoning tale to justify them. What makes more sense to me is asking what coalition of players have organized a hegemony they can enforce on everybody else, testing their credible threats and trying to form policy that can pass given their rulebook.

    Soon govt will be software, and much of this will simply go poof!

    Until then, it seems like politics has become TV production. Real life performance art.

  4. Gravatar of Morgan Warstler Morgan Warstler
    1. March 2016 at 21:26

    zephito

    all of it is planned.

    http://www.adweek.com/tvnewser/the-secret-of-donald-trumps-success-he-gets-how-television-works/284332

    http://www.avclub.com/article/reality-show-mogul-mark-burnett-wants-work-vladimi-221327

  5. Gravatar of E. Harding E. Harding
    1. March 2016 at 21:44

    Trump disavowed Duke’s endorsement before Sunday. And he retweets Twitter Nazis without regret. If deliberate, this is another ploy to challenge the media and shift the bounds of the Overton window of political behavior.

    “I used to think I understood America, but I have no idea what’s going on. It like the news media mixed up the election map into a sort of Picasso cubist painting.”

    -Pshaw; that’s simple. Massachusetts has a greater percentage of Blacks and Hispanics than Oklahoma, thus explaining the Democrats’ outcomes. Oklahoma is Plains Santorum Country, does not have that much of a Legacy of Slavery, and is right near Texas, where Everybody Likes Cruz. Massachusetts conservatives aren’t big on religion, so they’re fine with the Donald. Trump also appeals to Moderates, Reagan Democrats and Protectionists, of which there are more in Massachusetts than in Oklahoma. The real mystery here is Minnesota.

    “Pity that Rubio fell 3 points short in Virginia, otherwise the story might have been that the race is still wide open.”

    -That’s Texas, actually. And match-up polls mean nothing at this point, especially with an Ubermensch.

  6. Gravatar of E. Harding E. Harding
    1. March 2016 at 21:46

    Rubio’s biggest loss was failing to meet the 20% threshold in Texas, thus leading Trump and Cruz to get all Texas’s delegates. Victory is Trump’s.

  7. Gravatar of BC BC
    1. March 2016 at 21:57

    I noticed Trump’s large lead in the polls in Massachusetts a few days ago and couldn’t understand it. His supporters are not necessarily the most conservative voters. Sometimes Cruz does better among conservatives. Sometimes Cruz captures the evangelicals (Iowa); sometimes Trump does (South Carolina). The usual way of segmenting voters doesn’t seem to apply.

    One exit poll today showed that his support came from those that want an outsider [http://abcnews.go.com/Politics/wireStory/exit-poll-gop-super-tuesday-voters-sour-washington-37320950]. He captured 2/3 of voters looking for an outsider, and those voters make up 90% of his support! Maybe, the simplest explanation is that Trump is the none-of-the-above candidate, and his supporters are not voting for him, but just voting against everyone else. That might also explain why nothing he does or says erodes his support — his supporters may not be paying attention to any of that and just know that he is an outsider. If only Ben Carson and Carly Fiorina had done better, then the three of them could have split the “outsider vote”, and we wouldn’t be in this situation.

  8. Gravatar of E. Harding E. Harding
    1. March 2016 at 22:05

    BC, your lack of understanding shows merely your lack of attention. Trump does well among those who would have voted Democrat in 1920. He also does well among moderates and less religious Republicans. You make a good point about how people who like an outsider more are more likely to support Trump. I want an outsider.

    “Does anyone else think that Trump is as surprised as we are at his success?”

    -I don’t. Trump is a far more astute observer of the U.S. political sphere than Hitler was of the Soviet Union (or even France).

  9. Gravatar of BC BC
    1. March 2016 at 22:08

    Also, in the exit poll, Rubio did “well” (no numbers given) with voters looking for electability, but only 15% (???!) considered that quality important. Unlike normal years, maybe Republicans aren’t that focused on beating Clinton this time around. Instead, they are supporting Trump as a protest vote, not really caring if he loses in the general election. Again, that would explain why he’s like Teflon.

  10. Gravatar of E. Harding E. Harding
    1. March 2016 at 22:15

    @BC

    -Rubio is unelectable (hopefully). Kasich and Trump seem electable. Cruz is too corn-state for Florida.

  11. Gravatar of mbka mbka
    1. March 2016 at 23:17

    “I used to think I understood America, but I have no idea what’s going on. ”

    Scott,

    I don’t think it’s hard to understand. America naturally follows Europe in its footsteps. Maybe it’s some kind of natural social law that in the final analysis, 40% of the population will lean socialist, and 40% will lean national socialist. Which side gets the majority just depends on the charisma of the respective leader.

  12. Gravatar of mbka mbka
    1. March 2016 at 23:25

    Morgan,

    do you really think all destruction is _creative_ destruction?” For clues elsewhere, look at the populist right parties in Europe. Where they have done well, has it resulted in spectacular political healing? Any healing at all? Any fresh starts? His supporters seem to have the blind fervor that comes with revolutions. I just don’t see this going in any other direction than novel and creative forms of corruption replacing the old, and new cronies replacing the current ones.

  13. Gravatar of Ray Lopez Ray Lopez
    1. March 2016 at 23:51

    As Morgan Wartsler says in his own funny and loony way, Sumner finally ‘gets it’: Trump will say anything to get attention and thus votes, money. “No such thing as bad publicity” -old Hollywood maxim.

    So now Sumner can stop pretending Trump is the next American fascist. He’s just giving the people what they want, good and hard, like Mencken said about American democracy.

  14. Gravatar of Benjamin Cole Benjamin Cole
    2. March 2016 at 00:07

    Scott and All:

    1. One could select quotes from any GOP candidate, and make them look like lunatics, or sexist-racists. Evidently even Donk Sanders once wrote something about women fantasizing about rape. Gadzooks!

    2. Hillary Clinton mumbles and changes mushy positions constantly, so she rarely says anything memorable good or bad. I prefer Trump to that.

    3. Sanders is a socialist, and says he is a socialist. I actually like him for that. The other candidates are socialist-nationalists, and pretend they are not. Trump may be the exception. Cruz is sort of an exception, but probably not.

    4. Sumner and others seem to be confusing a pleasant demeanor with policy. Kasich can rhapsodize about more aircraft carriers in his genteel fashion, or Bush jr. can occupy two nations at once with carnage galore, and they are accepted non-demagogues. Trump shoots his mouth off, and is called a tyrant-demagogue. Not only that, most of the so-called horrible things Trump said were taken out of context, or are less offensive within context. I find some Trumpisms offensive. But not as offensive as drone-bombing a wedding party.

    5. The big question is, “Why is the GOP establishment so dead-set against Trump?” Trump says tax cuts for the rich, the usual GOP position. I can’t imagine Trump would be pro-regulations. I suspect what GOP groups fear is that access and federal slush will cease. There is a web of interest groups connected to the GOP, rural subsidy queens, veterans groups, “natural security” slush, and they have been funneling money into the GOP for years.

    I guess one could posit what the GOP establishment also wants is cheap immigrant labor, but without voting rights. That seems to be the current GOP de facto position. Oh, nothing offensive about that.

    6. Trump on Muslim immigrants. Okay, we ban Communist Party immigrants without the slightest controversy or murmur, but that does not make the Muslim ban right. Still, the only terrorist attacks the US has suffered were from people living here. The box-cutter Saudi Arabians on 9/11, or the San Bernardino kooks.

    Would it be better to ban Muslims for a while, or occupy two nations at once (Iraq and Afghanistan) at the cost of many trillions of dollars, and who knows how much carnage? The Trump plan strikes me as better than the Bush jr.-Obama plan occupation plans.

    So Bush jr. is not a horrible tyrant, but Trump is.

    Man, is the a barn-burner of an election or not?

    Trump is the most fascinating character on the political scene in 100 years and that tops Nixon, LBJ, Bill Clinton, Goldwater, and Reagan.

  15. Gravatar of Peter Peter
    2. March 2016 at 00:22

    Trump throws insults at pretty much everyone. But he has to do some research before criticizing KKK.

  16. Gravatar of HL HL
    2. March 2016 at 02:01

    Got this figure from Slate. Might be slightly different due to Alaska.

    Trump 34% of all votes cast on Tuesday
    Cruz 26.5%
    Rubio 22.3%

    Romney in 2012 (vs big field): about 40%

    John McCain in 2008 (vs smaller field): 42%

  17. Gravatar of Lorenzo from Oz Lorenzo from Oz
    2. March 2016 at 02:56

    If you want to understand Trump’s rhetorical strategy, read Scott Adams (yes, author of Dilbert).
    http://blog.dilbert.com/post/140272615821/strategic-ambiguity-master-persuasion-series

  18. Gravatar of Saturos Saturos
    2. March 2016 at 03:04

    Off-topic, but Scott is sure to find this amusing: Osama Bin Laden understood economics better than Fisher and Plosser https://news.vice.com/article/osama-bin-laden-thought-there-was-too-much-money-in-us-politics-declassified-letters-show

  19. Gravatar of H_WASSHOI (Miria Akagi lover) H_WASSHOI (Miria Akagi lover)
    2. March 2016 at 03:10

    You all guys are too much informed, so you can’t see actual future

    I think Trump-san don’t do stupid things what he is saying.
    Just he is using Clinton’s reaction function (because of outnumbers, defensive and conservative, they tend to say the same thing of him)

    http://www.japantimes.co.jp/news/2016/02/24/business/tpp-foe-clinton-threatens-action-japan-china-currency-manipulation/#.VtbFFnvp1ds

    Trump’s side is not doing mistake, Clinton’s side is doing mistake.

    http://www.nytimes.com/2016/02/23/opinion/campaign-stops/donald-trump-crony-capitalist.html?_r=0

    >As a businessman Mr. Trump has a longstanding habit of using his money and power aggressively to obtain special deals from the government.

    If it is true, easy, he is doing the same thing, using a few persons’s mistake

    my perceive, sincerely

    (I bought Trump on the Hypermind)

  20. Gravatar of Christian List Christian List
    2. March 2016 at 03:12

    @Lorenzo
    You need to read the Trump Master Persuader Reading List. Especially the entry “Clown Genius”.

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

    @ssumner
    “Trump’s biggest support today came from that well known southern redneck state called “Massachusetts”. In contrast, he didn’t do well in ultra-liberal states like Oklahoma.”

    Three explanations:

    #1 Massachusetts and Vermont got open primaries, Oklahoma doesn’t – according to my sources. So it might be tactical voting by people that favor Hillary.

    #2 Trump is not really a conservative. Many people from the center and the left might really like him and his policies.

    #3 The DP is the mainstream party in Massachusetts and Vermont. To be become a GOP supporters there you are usually more radical.

  21. Gravatar of guest guest
    2. March 2016 at 03:56

    Let’s dispel once and for all with this fiction that Donald Trump doesn’t know what he’s doing. He knows exactly what he’s doing.

  22. Gravatar of Nathan Nathan
    2. March 2016 at 04:22

    There have been 11 open primaries. Trump has won nine of them.

    There have been 4 closed primaries. Trump has lost all but one of them.

    Going forward, there are twice as many closed primaries as open ones.

    This ain’t over by a long shot.

  23. Gravatar of Art Deco Art Deco
    2. March 2016 at 04:49

    “I won’t disavow or not disavow David Duke. That way I can send a dog whistle to those southern rednecks I need on Tuesday, while still denying it later on.”

    The various Klanlets have a total membership of about 2,000, depending on whether or not you count the FBI informants. Working class white Southerners number north of 40 million. I’m guessing you don’t know many.

  24. Gravatar of Art Deco Art Deco
    2. March 2016 at 04:53

    Romney in 2012 (vs big field): about 40%

    John McCain in 2008 (vs smaller field): 42%

    Huh? John McCain had three vigorous competitors (Mitt Romney, Mike Huckabee, and Ron Paul). Mitt Romney had three vigorous competitors (Rick Santorum, Newt Gingrich, and Ron Paul). The remaining candidates in both circumstances imploded completely and hardly one any votes or delegates.

  25. Gravatar of Art Deco Art Deco
    2. March 2016 at 04:56

    -Rubio is unelectable (hopefully). Kasich and Trump seem electable. Cruz is too corn-state for Florida.

    None of the candidates poll much differently against Hellary or Sanders at this point. Rubio does a bit better than Cruz who does a bit better than Trump in the hypotheticals.

    Rubio’s problem is not that he’s ‘unelectable’. It’s that his wrong, he’s inexperienced, and he lies. Kasich is also wrong (and a jackass).

  26. Gravatar of Steve Steve
    2. March 2016 at 04:58

    “The real mystery here is Minnesota.”

    Not really. Liberal state, plus hard work. Rubio needed to win somewhere, so he chose a place where he had no competition.

    http://www.startribune.com/on-super-tuesday-minnesota-goes-its-own-way/370759421/

    “Rubio was the lone GOP candidate to drop into Minnesota as his rivals focused elsewhere, hosting a caucus-day rally in a Minneapolis suburb after a visit last week.”

  27. Gravatar of Art Deco Art Deco
    2. March 2016 at 05:00

    I’m a moderate Republican and I’m kinda hoping that this entire mess results in the dissolution of the Republican party. We can do a lot better than this. Center-right Americans need to form a new party.

    CA, why don’t you tell us what the Thornburgh-Whitman wing of the Republican Party has been up to (other than raising funds through their social connections)? Where are the policy shops, the street level organizers, the publications? They ain’t nowhere, because the social segments from which characters like Gov. Thornburgh and Gov. Whitman hail are fundamentally vacuous.

  28. Gravatar of Art Deco Art Deco
    2. March 2016 at 05:04

    Bad news for the Anti-Trump crowd: the wrong person (Cruz) was the one who over-performed.

    Nope. Rubio needs to follow his true vocation as a skeezy South Florida real estate agent. And talk to a financial planner.

  29. Gravatar of Major.Freedom Major.Freedom
    2. March 2016 at 05:05

    Andrew_FL agrees:

    http://consultingbyrpm.com/blog/2016/03/efficient-market-bubbles-and-why-is-scott-sumner-a-libertarian.html#comment-1650536

    When you combine all the criticisms of the GOP, the soft ball complaints about and personal flatteries and encouragements of left wing pundits and economists, the support for welfare programs, the focus on employment as the goal of deciding monetary policy, the general disdain and apathy towards the public taking care of themselves, the ostensible rejection of reason as a means to know apodictic truths and retreat to skepticism, Sumner’s views are mildly market oriented leftist.

  30. Gravatar of Art Deco Art Deco
    2. March 2016 at 05:07

    “Trump the Timid”

    I’m figuring you thought that was clever. It’s merely non sequitur.

  31. Gravatar of Art Deco Art Deco
    2. March 2016 at 05:12

    the general disdain and apathy towards the public taking care of themselves, the ostensible rejection of reason as a means to know apodictic truths and retreat to skepticism, Sumner’s views are mildly market oriented leftist

    Faculty rathskellar libertarians are not your friend. Or anyone’s, really. You should steal their inhaler if they’ve still got one.

  32. Gravatar of Steve Steve
    2. March 2016 at 05:45

    Kasich was on CNBC with Ken Langone and Stanley Druckenmiller.

    Kasich is a reasonable and earnest guy, but he also comes across as sanctimonious. Worse, he’s part of the Wall St thought bubble, where everyone has an opinion on the middle class they refuse to interact with. Druck was pushing means testing Langone’s social security. Yup, that’ll fix everything.

  33. Gravatar of Jonathan Jonathan
    2. March 2016 at 05:57

    I think the reason Sanders won Oklahoma is that the only people still willing to turn out for Democratic primaries there are the hard left who can’t stand the thought of registering as Republicans.

  34. Gravatar of Brian Donohue Brian Donohue
    2. March 2016 at 06:15

    Data point: Trump is 0 for 2 in midwestern states so far. 0 for 3 if you include Oklahoma.

  35. Gravatar of Steve Steve
    2. March 2016 at 06:19

    Kasich won the crusty suburbs: Lincoln, Wellesley, Concord, Brookline, Cambridge, Amherst.

    But Trump decimated everywhere else: 51% in Waltham, 59% Woburn, 73% Revere, 60% Lowell, 62% Peabody, 55% Provincetown

    Interestingly, Clinton had the same pattern: won 62% in crusty Concord and 62% in Jewish Brookline.

    However, Sanders won 80% of the counties in MA.

  36. Gravatar of Steve Steve
    2. March 2016 at 06:28

    Cruz won by a MASSIVE margin in Texas, almost 500,000 votes.
    Rubio picked up 2 delegates by virtue of keeping Austin weird.

    Strangely, Sanders won all of Oklahoma, except Oklahoma City, whereas Sanders lost all of Texas except Austin.

    I suspect this might be a factor:
    http://kfor.com/2015/10/29/oklahoma-obamacare-premiums-see-35-percent-price-hike/

    Sanders is scoring massive wins in the places that got f***** by Obamacare, including Oklahoma, New Hampshire, and non-crusty Massachusetts.

  37. Gravatar of Steve Steve
    2. March 2016 at 06:38

    Rubio and Clinton did extremely well in DC, and Norfolk. Warmongers!

    Jewish Bernie lost, but did comparatively well in redneck Appalachia.

    Godless big-government MA went for Trump and Clinton, the two godless tyrants.

    The god-fearing midwest has yet to vote for Trump.

  38. Gravatar of Thiago Ribeiro Thiago Ribeiro
    2. March 2016 at 06:42

    Maybe a Trump Administration doesn’t need to be bad. Some despicacle people presided over economic miracles (in fact, they created those Miracles by being despicacle, the only decent guy I remember to have presided over a modern, important economic miracle was Adenauer). If Trump can cure America’s Malaise (the Colonels did it for Greece, the Generals did it for Brazil, Franco did for Spain, Chiang Ching-kuo did it for Taiwan, Park did it for Korea, Deng et al did it for China– Carter and Hoover, however, were any mother-in-law’s dream …), subsequent Administrations will be able to zero in on more specific problems (or squander the opportunity, like Greece’s and Brazil’s did). The American Establishment is clearly out of ammo anyway.
    To be frank, I am bullish on America. It is, perhaps, the end of the beginning of the end of the post-2007 nightmare.

  39. Gravatar of Steve Steve
    2. March 2016 at 06:49

    This election can be predicted by a two-factor model: culture and economics.

    The plutocrats like Clinton and Kasich, and protected workers like Rubio. Everyone who is insecure likes Sanders, Cruz, or Trump, unless they are black–then Clinton. The Obamacare-hating rednecks are voting for a Jew.

    The Heartland wants a dignified president, while the South and Northeast don’t care. Texans want values, New England wants Trump.

  40. Gravatar of zephito zephito
    2. March 2016 at 06:58

    Steve,

    Wrong, Trump carried the Tidewater, including Norfolk. Rubio actually underperformed there, relative to his performance in the other urban areas (NOVA, Richmond, Henrico). Had he carried Tidewater he would have won. Clinton did do very well in the SE (high 60s, low 70s vs. overall total of 63%), but only met or came in slightly below her overall state performance in NOVA. I don’t think your analysis is correct here.

  41. Gravatar of ssumner ssumner
    2. March 2016 at 07:09

    Harding, Actually, Massachusetts is more white than Oklahoma, and the Democratic party on Massachusetts is much more white than in Oklahoma. Check the data before commenting.

    Mbka, You misunderstood my comment, I was referring to the odd results by state, not Trump’s success.

    Thanks HL, I had thought Trump was at about 40% nationally in the polls.

    Nathan, That’s good to hear.

    Art, You said:

    “The various Klanlets have a total membership of about 2,000, depending on whether or not you count the FBI informants. Working class white Southerners number north of 40 million. I’m guessing you don’t know many.”

    It’s pretty hard to win the prize for dumbest comment in a post about Trump, but congratulations. I’m touched by your naive belief that there are only 2000 racists in America, who would find Trump’s dog whistles to be appealing. Especially given that polls in South Carolina show 75% support a ban on Muslim immigrants. 2000, out of 300 million, wow, American must be amazingly free of racism.

    You said:

    “why don’t you tell us what the Thornburgh-Whitman wing of the Republican Party has been up to”

    Another amazingly idiotic comet. Sorry to break the news to you, but the Trump phenomenon is also a rejection of the conservative wing of the GOP.

    Warning, you are approaching Ray Lopez levels of childishness.

    Brian, Maybe my loathing of Trump represents my “Midwestern nice” roots. I can’t imagine Iowa and Minnesota residents would care for his personality. On the other hand Massachusetts has lots of assholes, so maybe that explains his strong performance here.

    Steve, Interesting that the Jewish socialist from New York wins rural New England and Hillary wins urban New England. Back in the 1936 election, rural New England was the only place FDR did not win.

  42. Gravatar of Patrick R. Sullivan Patrick R. Sullivan
    2. March 2016 at 07:37

    I think Trump has a problem after last night. He needs a first ballot victory at the Republican convention, and it doesn’t look like he’s headed for that now.

    If no one gets a majority of the delegates in the first ballot, then anyone can be nominated. Even Mitt Romney.

  43. Gravatar of E. Harding E. Harding
    2. March 2016 at 07:42

    “Actually, Massachusetts is more white than Oklahoma,”

    -I checked before making my statement, and I’ve seen no evidence to suggest it’s untrue.

    “and the Democratic party on Massachusetts is much more white than in Oklahoma.”

    -Sounds right. Legitimate point.

    “I can’t imagine Iowa and Minnesota residents would care for his personality. On the other hand Massachusetts has lots of assholes, so maybe that explains his strong performance here.”

    -Makes sense.

  44. Gravatar of sejanus sejanus
    2. March 2016 at 07:51

    you are incorrigible. these political posts have nothing to do with the money illusion. but it is your blog. just makes folks such as myself visit less. and btw, i do read your econlog. i don’t complain about distractions there. QED

  45. Gravatar of Art Deco Art Deco
    2. March 2016 at 08:18

    It’s pretty hard to win the prize for dumbest comment in a post about Trump, but congratulations. I’m touched by your naive belief that there are only 2000 racists in America, who would find Trump’s dog whistles to be appealing. Especially given that polls in South Carolina show 75% support a ban on Muslim immigrants. 2000, out of 300 million, wow, American must be amazingly free of racism.

    You win a prize for a deficit of reading comprehension and social knowledge (as well as plain bad manners). Social and cultural antagonisms are unremarkable, though not very motivating most of the time. Professors suffer from them worse than do most people. An interest in and admiration for something as aesthetically unappealing as the Klan is quite abnormal, which is why there are very few Klansmen. You fancy he’s currying favor with people who like that brand. People who like that brand hardly exist in appreciable numbers.

  46. Gravatar of Art Deco Art Deco
    2. March 2016 at 08:21

    Another amazingly idiotic comet. Sorry to break the news to you, but the Trump phenomenon is also a rejection of the conservative wing of the GOP.

    Perfectly irrelevant to the point I was making.

    Warning, you are approaching Ray Lopez levels of childishness.

    Now you’re just projecting.

  47. Gravatar of TheManFromFairwinds TheManFromFairwinds
    2. March 2016 at 08:29

    Opinions on MA being the state with the highest Trump support (49%)?

  48. Gravatar of Steve Steve
    2. March 2016 at 08:45

    Patrick Sullivan,

    Trump has 50.5% of delegates so far, and we still aren’t into the winner take all. I think Trump wins a 4-man race, and a 2-man race, because the outsiders have the majority, and there are many godless people who prefer Trump over Cruz.

    However, I think in a 3-man race, the remaining insider (Kasich or Rubio) wins. Unfortunately this person might lose the general by depressing turnout.

    Even worse would be a brokered vote for someone like Romney. There would be an outright revolt if that happened.

    I think the Republicans need an inside/out coalition with Cruz and Kasich or Rubio in order to win both the primary and general. Anything else loses legitimacy.

    I want to like Rubio, but he has been unsteady lately: the debate, the sex jokes, shooting Russian planes, and lying.

    Kasich might be a steadier pair with Cruz, but they’d have to get on the same page with policy. It’s a big mess.

  49. Gravatar of Christian List Christian List
    2. March 2016 at 08:46

    @Patrick R. Sullivan
    If no one gets a majority of the delegates in the first ballot, then anyone can be nominated. Even Mitt Romney.

    Yeah, I want Mitt Romney back. Or Ted Cruz. Cruz is still alive. I bet Cruz did better than this *stupid* British betting markets predicted.

    @Art Deco
    I appreciate your comments and the fact that you can use italics. How do you do it? With “em” or “i” with “>” or “[“?

    Test: [i]italic[/i] vs. italic

  50. Gravatar of Christian List Christian List
    2. March 2016 at 08:48

    Okay it’s “em” and “>”

  51. Gravatar of Steve Steve
    2. March 2016 at 09:13

    Cruz is back at 10/1 on Paddypower, after being what, 80/1 yesterday?

    The same sort of elites and pundits who are running around like Marie Antoinette making inane strategy and inane comments, are also the ones betting.

  52. Gravatar of E. Harding E. Harding
    2. March 2016 at 09:14

    “Yeah, I want Mitt Romney back. Or Ted Cruz. Cruz is still alive. I bet Cruz did better than this *stupid* British betting markets predicted.”

    -Only in Oklahoma (possibly Alaska as well). The markets still have him at under 5% for the nomination. In fact, the numbers don’t even add up to 100%.

  53. Gravatar of Patrick R. Sullivan Patrick R. Sullivan
    2. March 2016 at 09:16

    ‘Trump has 50.5% of delegates so far, and we still aren’t into the winner take all.’

    Tactically, Cruz and Kasich should urge their Florida supporters to vote for Rubio, and Rubio and Cruz should urge their Ohio supporters to vote for Kasich.

  54. Gravatar of Gary Anderson Gary Anderson
    2. March 2016 at 09:29

    Lol I laughed through this entire article. Scott is better at political punditry than he is at economics. You are very clever, Sumner!

    Scott, no one still is explaining why we have little demand for borrowing in the US while the big banks are lending their socks off somewhere. There is an orgy of lending going on but where: https://research.stlouisfed.org/fred2/graph/?g=3xG8

  55. Gravatar of Joe Joe
    2. March 2016 at 09:33

    “Massachusetts has a lot of assholes”. Does that explain why Trump does well in the east & south, but not out west? People out in the west (especially Oregonians) are really nice. Too nice when you’re trying to get somewhere on the expressway behind all these pleasant people driving 50 mph.

    Maybe we need an asshole map of America to predict Trump’s next victories.

    Nate Silver on the major political realignment we might be experiencing right now: http://fivethirtyeight.com/features/dont-assume-conservatives-will-rally-behind-trump/

  56. Gravatar of Art Deco Art Deco
    2. March 2016 at 10:04

    The same sort of elites and pundits who are running around like Marie Antoinette making inane strategy and inane comments, are also the ones betting.

    Our ‘elites’ and ‘pundits’ are alcohol-soaked Brits?

  57. Gravatar of Tom Brown Tom Brown
    2. March 2016 at 10:34

    So much fun. Let’s stir the pot and have some more fun:

    @E. Harding, were you aware that John Podhoretz was against Trump?:

    “John Podhoretz: Trump Would Be Nothing Less Than a Disaster as President”

    http://www.bloomberg.com/politics/videos/2016-02-25/john-podhoretz-donald-trump-would-be-a-disaster-as-president

    John opposes him, and you *still* support Trump??? Lol

    @Art Deco, did you notice that Steve (above) has three times used the term “Godless” in relation to Trump supporters? He even called Trump a “Godless tyrant” (I thought you had to have power before you could be a tyrant. Who knew?). Remind you of anyone?

  58. Gravatar of collin collin
    2. March 2016 at 10:56

    Remember the core Trump voters are the old Reagan Democrats/Perot voters or children that were most hurt by the de-manufacturing of the US economy and the stagnant wages of the last 15 (or 40 years). And these voters are heaviest in the the Rust Belt and NE states in which Trump is the strongest in the nation on the Republican side. (Also the reason why Cruz or Rubio path is limited at this point as NY, NJ, PA and maybe even OH are winner take all and Trump is expected to win.) In 2013, It was Sean Trende that identified these as the missing voters in 2012 that did not vote and hurt Romney’s chances.

    Otherwise, Oklahoma used to the home of a lot socialist 100 years ago and maybe there still of that in the state to support Sanders. But the biggest thing that is deciding almost every Democratic Primary is the percentage of minority voters in the state. HRC is crushing Bernie with African-Americans and carrying a high majority of Latino voters while Bernie takes a majority of white liberals. (MA and CO are sort of different.) So it is no surprise Oklahoma went Bernie.

  59. Gravatar of Christian List Christian List
    2. March 2016 at 10:57

    I would really like to hear an economic theory by Scott about the Trump phenomenon. It could be *wonkish* of course. Are “election markets” inefficient? Are voters being irrational and stupid? Is Trump a bubble?


    It’s a moment of truth where the GOP must decide if it wants to turn into an American version of France’s National Front.

    I think it’s exactly the other way round. The establishment needs to ask itself: Why don’t we reach so many voters anymore? What have we done wrong? What can we do better? Trump and parties like Front National are not the cause but just a symptom.

  60. Gravatar of Michael Rulle Michael Rulle
    2. March 2016 at 10:57

    What is that quote attributed to Kissinger or someone like him?

    Speaking of academia he said something like “politics in academia are so vicious because the stakes are so small”. He should have left out “in academia”. Every election cycle is the most important in history (in a way thats true if you are a now-ist). I fell a year short of getting my PHD in Political science (got my MBA instead—good call) but spent 5 years in grad school writing various papers, following elections, etc. I think I am fairly astute when I say that the most important thing I learned is simply how crazy people get over politics.(politics is not government—don’t have the time or energy to make the distinction here).

    Recently I thought back to the Nixon-Kennedy election when the world believed it was the most important decision the country could ever make. Then I tried to remember what the election was about (although just a child at the time, my father was a local politician and I got sucked into politics quite early). I could not remember what the election was even about. I dare anyone to tell us a non-Oliver Stone reason as to why that election “mattered”. In retrospect, they had virtually the same philosophy.

    We go crazy over politics. Jimmy Carter started deregulation but lost 48 states because he wore a sweater in front of a fire and told us to save on energy. People thought Reagan was an idiot and a crazy man bent on ending the world as we know it.

    So I do agree with the concept that our politics are so vicious because the stakes are so small.

    By the way, this is a good thing. Think about it.

  61. Gravatar of Steve Steve
    2. March 2016 at 11:05

    “Also the reason why Cruz or Rubio path is limited at this point as NY, NJ, PA and maybe even OH are winner take all and Trump is expected to win.”

    Actually this is a big warning sign for Trump. All of his delegates are going to come from states he can’t hope to win in the general.

    It would be bad if the unwinnable blue states pick the republican nominee. (Unless you are a democrat)

  62. Gravatar of Tom Brown Tom Brown
    2. March 2016 at 11:07

    @Art Deco, recall yesterday I shared some of Erickson’s “boy who cried wolf” hyperventilating headlines about Trump, including the one about Trump bringing “nuclear annihilation” to the Republican party?… and how I suspect his efforts will fall short because he’s been hyperventilating for 8 years now, and his words have lost all meaning? Well, he’s not quitting that strategy. Check out some of the ones today:

    http://theresurgent.com/donald-trump-stars-as-the-candidate-of-the-kkk/

    “Donald Trump Stars as the Candidate of the KKK”

    “Trump The Uniter…Of Jew Haters”

    “Is Bringing Back Slavery Part of Making America Great Again?”

    Wow. Again, wow. You’d think they were talking about an establishment “RINO” or even Obama with all that hyperbole. Knowing they’re talking about the anti-Establishment GOP frontrunner, you might think those were headlines straight from the “The Young Spartacus”.

  63. Gravatar of Art Deco Art Deco
    2. March 2016 at 11:09

    @Art Deco, did you notice that Steve

    No, I didn’t.

  64. Gravatar of Tom Brown Tom Brown
    2. March 2016 at 11:10

    Erickson’s rag likes to talk about putting those to death who worship the golden calf… thinking God is on his side. Maybe he’s the one worshiping the calf?

  65. Gravatar of Art Deco Art Deco
    2. March 2016 at 11:11

    All of his delegates are going to come from states he can’t hope to win in the general.

    Ohio is generally competitive and Pennsylvania’s not indigo.

  66. Gravatar of Tom Brown Tom Brown
    2. March 2016 at 11:25

    @Michael Rulle,

    “So I do agree with the concept that our politics are so vicious because the stakes are so small.

    By the way, this is a good thing. Think about it.”

    Man, I’d *LOVE* to believe that. I hope it’s actually true. In my ideal world (a pure fantasy, I know), political campaigns would have all the excitement of an engineering preliminary design review. Completely devoid of talk of “crises” and other hysteria and emotionalism. And for me, that actually would be more interesting!

  67. Gravatar of Christian List Christian List
    2. March 2016 at 11:26


    What is that quote attributed to Kissinger or someone like him?

    There you go:
    http://freefamousquotes.net/academic-politics-are-so-vicious-precisely-because-the-stakes-are-so-small/


    People thought Reagan was an idiot and a crazy man bent on ending the world as we know it.

    That’s exactly what I’ve been saying. Every election is sold as the most important in history ever. And at least one side is always saying that their opponent is the biggest crazy man ever. In recent years it was mostly the DP. Think of Goldwater, Nixon, Reagan, Bush II. And now Trump.

    The DP and the media are pulling of act after act similar to Jehovah’s Witnesses or any other Doomsday sect:

    “The end of the world is near. Do you feel it?!”

    “This time is different! This time it’s really going to happen!”

    “Unless…”

    They are like goldbugs and bubble prophets.

  68. Gravatar of Steve Steve
    2. March 2016 at 11:38

    For those of you who support Trump, his poll ratings are about to go up. Romney is planning a tin-eared address tomorrow, urging Republicans to adopt Bernie Sanders’ agenda.

    Romney said he shared the feeling of many Americans that Washington has failed them and urged national leaders to tackle big problems such as climate change, poverty, education and income inequality.

    “We’re just mad as hell and won’t take it anymore,” Romney said

    https://www.washingtonpost.com/news/post-politics/wp/2016/03/02/mitt-romney-to-address-the-2016-presidential-campaign-thursday/

  69. Gravatar of Tom Brown Tom Brown
    2. March 2016 at 12:02

    @Art Deco, here’s WaPo neocon columnist Jennifer Rubin today echoing the same sort of moralizing lectures as Erickson: calling Trump supporters morally deficient, his religious supporters “hucksters” and his party supporters “soul-less” opportunists. The nicest thing she has to say is that the Trump voters themselves are mostly uneducated know-nothings, rather than out and out racists (though she says those are there too). The holier-than-thou set is out to shame Trump’s base of support:

    https://www.washingtonpost.com/blogs/right-turn/wp/2016/03/02/lets-name-and-shame-trumps-enablers/

    At this point they don’t care about permanently damaging the GOP.

  70. Gravatar of Student Student
    2. March 2016 at 12:18

    Some interesting trump facts that have been reported. If these turn out to be true, the fact that Trump leads the republican pack is amazing.

    1.) The Huffington Post is reporting that James Edwards, a notorious white supremacist is promoting a recent interview with Donald Trump Jr. that will air on saturday.

    He was broadcasting live from a Trump rally and was granted press passes and VIP parking, per the report.

    He is also reported to have said that Trump will be the first Republican nominee that he will ever have voted for.

    http://www.huffingtonpost.com/entry/white-supremacists-donald-trump-rallies_us_56d663cfe4b03260bf789a09

    2.) A video has emerged that show a group of people shoving a black teenager who was holding a protest sign at a Trump rally.

    There is a guy in a red hat that shoves her, screams at her, and appears to jab her with a pen or something.

    Shaun King of the New York Daily News is reporting that they guy in the red hat (who is wearing a traditionalist worker party shirt) is named Mathew Heimbach and is one of the best known youth leaders of modern white supremacy and neo-nazism in the country.

    He also reports that there were many traditionalist worker party members there wearing these shirts.

    You can hear trump in the background saying “get out of here” and “you know in the old days, which wasn’t so long ago, when we were less politically correct, that kind of thing wouldn’t have happened”.

    Not exactly sure what he meant by that comment but it surely sounds provocative given the context.

    https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=JTykPkdLWXs

  71. Gravatar of E. Harding E. Harding
    2. March 2016 at 12:29

    I think 2008 was inevitable, 2012 was a less-important-than-average election, and 2016 is the most important (and interesting) election since at least 1980.

    “@E. Harding, were you aware that John Podhoretz was against Trump?”

    -I expected that.

  72. Gravatar of Tom Brown Tom Brown
    2. March 2016 at 12:35

    @E. Harding, why is it that Jennifer Rubin, Podhoretz, and Mark Levin are so anti-Trump? To the point of (in the case of Rubin at least) vowing support to the #NeverTrump (primary or general) movement? Do you suppose it might have to do with his Middle East foreign policy statements? A view they seem to share with certain fundamentalist Christian sects who seem convinced that the name of a certain small country formed in 1948 is of utmost importance. I’d LOVE to hear your views. Don’t hold back!

  73. Gravatar of jknarr jknarr
    2. March 2016 at 12:50

    Scott,

    I might point out that Trump is the only guy advocating a full audit of the Federal Reserve. This is well deserved, IMHO, as no branch of government is above scrutiny.

    The Fed’s conduct of monetary policy would very likely be improved from such a move. No other candidate has called for an audit — Trump is alone in this. (Which perhaps explains the current coordinated 24-7 full court smear job on Trump.)

    An audit would open the door to NGDPLT. Otherwise, its just business as usual. I have come to think that you are in favor of NGDPLT (but your message is getting lost in the political weeds). Am I wrong?

    Again, what are you trying to accomplish? Airing your personal biases is a smelly business.

  74. Gravatar of Tom Brown Tom Brown
    2. March 2016 at 13:09

    @jknarr, an audit of the Fed? What accounting secrets have they been hiding from us? And do you seriously think a Trump admin or Congress will push the Fed towards NGDPLT? Given the current makeup of Congress it wouldn’t surprise me if they recruited Peter Schiff, Ron Paul and other inflation Hawks, gold bugs and internet Austrians to help them form a “devastating” line of questioning. And if it blows up in their faces, they’ll find a scapegoat to blame. Welfare recipients? “International bankers” perhaps? That’s a go to favorite… going on many centuries now. Everyone knows it *can’t* be the fault of goldbuggery and inflation hawkery… Those ideas can’t be false since they’re unfalsifiable. Lol

  75. Gravatar of Art Deco Art Deco
    2. March 2016 at 13:26

    @Art Deco, here’s WaPo neocon columnist Jennifer Rubin today echoing the same sort of moralizing lectures

    I don’t particularly care for Rubin’s writing on any issue and I’m not sure why you’re flagging this for me. (BTW, ‘neocon’ is a nonsense term. It’s a signifier of stews of alt-right silliness when it’s not one of red haze silliness).

  76. Gravatar of Art Deco Art Deco
    2. March 2016 at 13:30

    @E. Harding, why is it that Jennifer Rubin, Podhoretz, and Mark Levin are so anti-Trump?

    Cannot say about Levin. Jennifer Rubin’s a business Republican for whom OPEN BORDERS is baseline. John Podhoretz is not too far off from that. Tamar Jacoby is in the Podhoretz circle. She’s very up front about the whys of her advocacy: it starts with the Ellis Island narrative.

  77. Gravatar of msgkings msgkings
    2. March 2016 at 13:30

    @Christian: come on, man. Both sides do the exact same thing. “Obama will destroy America etc” sound familiar?

    Partisans on both sides are just so boring and stupid.

  78. Gravatar of Art Deco Art Deco
    2. March 2016 at 13:31

    Do you suppose it might have to do with his Middle East foreign policy statements?

    No.

  79. Gravatar of msgkings msgkings
    2. March 2016 at 13:32

    @ Tom Brown: everything Rubin wrote is exactly correct. Sometimes elitists really are more elite than those they look down on.

  80. Gravatar of Art Deco Art Deco
    2. March 2016 at 13:34

    Some interesting trump facts

    Those aren’t ‘trump facts’. Those are stories about private citizens you’ve never heard of supposedly (in the telling of hostile reporters) doing disagreeable things in public places.

  81. Gravatar of Tom Brown Tom Brown
    2. March 2016 at 13:37

    Some classic Ann Coulter tweets:


    Not crazy about all the fire & brimstone from Cruz. It’s hardly very Canadian of him.

    Cruz Records Weakest Home State GOP Primary Victory in Party History

    Gov. Huckabee: They pushed Trump into committing to the party, but now they won’t stand behind him. I’m sick of D.C.

    20K MA Dems re-registered as GOPs B4 this primary, says Sec of State. I think this compensates for losing Stephen Hayes & John Podhoretz.

    The Somalis carried little Rubio to victory in MN!

    Yes, GOP is horribly split! 65 million Americans on one side & 500 pundits, consultants & lobbyists on the other!

    Hmmm, Huckabee defending Trump and slamming the #NeverTrump crowd… Will Rubin call him an “immoral religious huckster” and will Erickson call him a fake Christian, and question his commitment to “Bible inerrancy?” More popcorn please… this is great!

  82. Gravatar of Art Deco Art Deco
    2. March 2016 at 13:38

    Jimmy Carter started deregulation but lost 48 states because he wore a sweater in front of a fire and told us to save on energy.

    He lost 44 states. Might have had something to do with the 12% inflation, the gas lines, and the serial humiliations at the hands of the Iranian government and auxiliaries. Guess none of your graduate courses included contemporary history.

  83. Gravatar of msgkings msgkings
    2. March 2016 at 13:39

    Funny watching everyone parse why others are anti-Trump and ignoring the obvious which is that Trump is an embarrassing, lying, immature, unqualified, unpresidential, racist demagogue. Like there needs to be any more reason than that.

  84. Gravatar of Art Deco Art Deco
    2. March 2016 at 13:42

    Will Rubin call him an “immoral religious huckster”

    She’s likely done that already. Rubin gonna Rubin. She’s a secular professional-managerial class nuisance who exhibits the tastes and prejudices of that set. Not much to see here.

  85. Gravatar of Tom Brown Tom Brown
    2. March 2016 at 13:43

    @msgkings, well obviously, but the fun is watching the vipers turn on each other in the viper pit.

  86. Gravatar of msgkings msgkings
    2. March 2016 at 13:47

    @Art: I always admired what seemed like a principled paleo-con stance from you in these blogs: pro-life, staunch old school Catholic, non-racist, respectful of serious politicians with gravitas, supportive of the regular middle class small business types outside of the cities….and now you are totally in the tank for that pro-choice, liberal-until-a-year-ago, atheist embarrassing juvenile racist asshole. You are a hypocrite, son.

  87. Gravatar of msgkings msgkings
    2. March 2016 at 13:49

    @Tom: indeed. This cycle is an absolute blast. Probably due to it being the first Twitter-based cycle.

  88. Gravatar of Thiago Ribeiro Thiago Ribeiro
    2. March 2016 at 13:51

    “For those of you who support Trump, his poll ratings are about to go up. Romney is planning a tin-eared address tomorrow, urging Republicans to adopt Bernie Sanders’ agenda.

    ‘Romney said he shared the feeling of many Americans that Washington has failed them and urged national leaders to tackle big problems such as climate change, poverty, education and income inequality’.”
    Oh, so Sanders have the right answers on those issues? Can’t the Republicans think of any decent non-Sanderite ideas?

  89. Gravatar of Student Student
    2. March 2016 at 13:56

    @Art,

    Freeze the video at 0:22 and tell me that isn’t Heimbach. There is a decent picture of him on the Southern Poverty Law Center website here:

    https://www.splcenter.org/hatewatch/2015/11/04/white-nationalist-matthew-heimbach-banned-united-kingdom

    No doubt that is him.

    As well, tune it to James’ racist broadcast on Saturday and watch the interview for yourself.

  90. Gravatar of Tom Brown Tom Brown
    2. March 2016 at 14:03

    @msgkings, I had some fun a couple weeks back: I emailed the conservative “Catholic League” (run by Bill Donohue… whom you sometimes see invited on cable news shows, and who had the honor of being lampooned by South Park once). informing them of Ann Coulter’s anti-Catholic tweets. Sure enough they called her out on it and sent me a link thanking me for the heads up:
    http://www.catholicleague.org/ann-coulters-catholic-problem/
    It’s funny that they still managed to get in a dig on Bill Maher, even though he had nothing to do with it.

  91. Gravatar of Tom Brown Tom Brown
    2. March 2016 at 14:05

    … if the vipers slack off with their biting, sometimes you have to poke them with a stick.

  92. Gravatar of Tom Brown Tom Brown
    2. March 2016 at 14:44

    @Art Deco,

    I use “neocon” for conservatives who aren’t necessarily against big government or “compassionate conservatism” but who are primarily concerned with making sure the US has a very aggressive, unilateral (if “necessary”) and interventionist foreign policy. The people who might try to sell us on a preemptive war with Iran say. I could call them “war mongers” if that’s a better fit.

    Also, you write here, answering my question to E. Harding:

    “Do you suppose it might have to do with his Middle East foreign policy statements?

    No.”

    I figured as much. But that’s why I want to see E. Harding’s opinion on this. My spidey-sense tells me he’ll be more fun.

  93. Gravatar of Art Deco Art Deco
    2. March 2016 at 15:03

    now you are totally in the tank for that pro-choice,

    You managed to misinterpret me coming and going.

    Read City Journal, read Crisis, read Touchstone, and you know what I think.

  94. Gravatar of Art Deco Art Deco
    2. March 2016 at 15:10

    I use “neocon” for conservatives who aren’t necessarily against big government

    The ‘big government’ / ‘small government’ discourse is another set of pointless word salads.

    The alt-right use ‘neocon’ as a synonym for ‘Jew’. The red haze use it as a synonym for Jason Voorhees. The more loquacious alt-right partisans (think Joseph Sobran) use the term as a component of a fanciful alternative history in which Jew-wire pullers Jedi-mind trick Wm. F. Buckley and 1,000 others and act aa a parasitoid wasp on the corpus of the conservative movement, making use of it toward their own nefarious purposes. Sometimes they elaborate on this with a lunatic mess which includes blather about Trotskyists and Leo Strauss.

  95. Gravatar of Tom Brown Tom Brown
    2. March 2016 at 15:22

    @Art Deco, lets see if that’s where Harding takes the word “neocon.” The push-back you give on it’s use echos almost precisely that given by Rubin: i.e. that’s it’s code for “Jew.” I’m not familiar with the “alt-right” or those other people you mention though. Do you take issue with Wikipedia’s take?

    Meanwhile, Christian moralist-in-chief is back at it with warnings of apocalyptic doom. I suspect (and hope) Christian Trump supporters are very offended by that constant holier-than-thou harping.

  96. Gravatar of Tom Brown Tom Brown
    2. March 2016 at 15:31

    @Art Deco, do you take issue with Irving Kristol’s book and take on the term “neoconservative?” In this interview he says that though he didn’t come up with the term, it seems to him like “a pretty good term.”

    I thought you Trump people are fed up with the PC-patrol anyway? All this tip-toeing around language, being careful to avoid “trigger words” that might offend somebody. What gives?

  97. Gravatar of Tom Brown Tom Brown
    2. March 2016 at 15:43

    In my meaning of the word (i.e. “warmonger”), Cheney (& daughter) take top billing, followed by W, Rumsfeld, and they’re all Christian AFAIK.

  98. Gravatar of Christian List Christian List
    2. March 2016 at 15:44

    Both sides do the exact same thing.
    I do think the differences are important.

    I think McCain’s campaign against Obama for example was pretty fair. I don’t think it was hysterical or said that Obama would destroy America.

    On a sidenote:
    And even if it said so it would have meant only that Obama’s policies would reshape the US. It’s okay to focus on the US in the US President elections, isn’t it?

    The DP (and media outlets close to them) are usually talking about the world and how a GOP president would destroy the world. The world. And how he would physically destroy it. They don’t aim for something smaller than that. It must be the physical destruction of the world. Like a villain in a Bond movie.

    embarrassing, lying, immature, unqualified, unpresidential, racist demagogue.
    That’s exactly what I meant. I think we discussed that already. But you prove my point. The GOP candidate according the DP and most media outlets in the US is always an embarrassing, lying, immature, unqualified, unpresidential, racist demagogue.

    So I always ask myself: Why still an election? Why still a democracy? Why still two parties? Why not a DP President automatically and for all eternity?

    We are being told time and time again that a GOP President would destroy the world physically. Therefore his election must be outlawed. Or not?

  99. Gravatar of Ian Ian
    2. March 2016 at 15:47

    Apple completely disrupted the phone market with the IPhone. The existing vendors thought they owned the market but were wrong. Trump is disrupting the Republican party in the same outsider way.

  100. Gravatar of Tom Brown Tom Brown
    2. March 2016 at 16:01

    @Art Deco, I looked up and read the highlighted Trump article (“Stop “Explaining” Trump”) in City Journal (by a guy named Oren Cass) you mentioned. I do like the way he ends it:

    “Those who hate conservatism can indulge their schadenfreude while it lasts. Conservatives will just have to get back to work.”

    As an ex-Republican (though still registered that way), who used to consider himself a secular moderate conservative, until the ground moved to the right beneath my feet (Iraq, 2003, and continuing even today), that almost nails it for me! I am indulging my schadenfreude “while it lasts.” Probably easy to tell I suppose. I hope they do get back to work and make something capable of appealing to me again this time.

  101. Gravatar of John Hamilton John Hamilton
    2. March 2016 at 16:04

    I’ve been watching the exit polls and the like very closely, so I think I can help you understand this insanity (on the Republican side at least):

    1. Weekly church attendance predicts Trump opposition. The South is NOT home to highest percentages of weekly church-goers; rather, middle America (from Oklahoma to North Dakota) holds this title. The South IS home to lots of folks who identify as “Evangelical” on exit polls but do not actually go to church.

    2. States with closed primaries (ie, only registered Republicans are voting) have voted for non-Trump candidates most of the time (those states are Oklahoma, Alaska, Iowa, and Nevada). On March 5, Kansas, Kentucky, Louisiana and Maine all will have closed primaries/caucuses; I predict Trump will under-perform his polls in these states.

    3. Think about the implications of #2. People who usually turn-out for Republican primaries is a small fraction of electorate. Trump has energized a weird crowd of anti-immigrant/anti-Muslim crowd to turn out for primaries. Usually they do not vote. Republican primary voters are voting weird, because the folks who make up Republican primary voters are different this cycle.

  102. Gravatar of Tom Brown Tom Brown
    2. March 2016 at 16:12

    @John Hamilton,

    “Trump has energized a weird crowd of anti-immigrant/anti-Muslim crowd to turn out for primaries.”

    Can you point me to where the pro-immigrant and/or pro-Muslim VOTERS are concentrated within the GOP? If such a block of voters exists, they are totally off the radar as far as I can tell. I personally would have qualified when I used to vote GOP (I had lots of moderate Muslim friends I’d met in college, some of whom were Republicans themselves, and I was very pro-immigration). Where are voters like me now in the GOP?

  103. Gravatar of Scott H. Scott H.
    2. March 2016 at 16:35

    We just had a President that could approvingly (or at least passively) sit through a sermon punctuated by “God Damn America!”, and Mr. Sumner is going nuclear on Trump?

    It’s not just that. I recently read a piece in the WaPo by Larry Summers that makes me think that Trump must be sleeping with Larry’s wife. The article was a monument to baseless accusations, wild conjecture, and shrill fear mongering.

    Politics makes people do strange things.

  104. Gravatar of E. Harding E. Harding
    2. March 2016 at 16:36

    “The alt-right use ‘neocon’ as a synonym for ‘Jew’.”

    -They overlap, certainly, but nobody has ever accused Bernie Sanders or Uri Avnery of neoconnery or Marco Rubio or Rudy Giuliani of not being neocons. Important elements of neoconnery (e.g., Russophobia, Persophobia, Israel-first, pro-Gaddafi-overthrow, Saudiphilia) are all too popular among gentiles.

    “@E. Harding, why is it that Jennifer Rubin, Podhoretz, and Mark Levin are so anti-Trump?”

    Mark Levin due to him thinking Donald Trump is Not a True Conservative:

    “Trump is NOT the real deal. He will get Obama re-elected. This is not a game. This is not a circus. He is not a conservative. He was happy to donate to Schumer, Weiner, & Emanuel campaigns last year. He was pro-choice recently and now claims to be pro-life.”

    -Mark Levin, 2011

    Rubin and Podhoretz hate Trump because he is anti-establishment, and they really want a bought robot they feel their tribe can control, or, as with Ted Cruz, at least influence. Trump’s stridently independent. He does not listen to the Establishment’s Invade the World, Invite the World, Import the World, In Hock to the World mantra. He openly denounces it. That’s why they’re so mad he’s popular.

    “Do you suppose it might have to do with his Middle East foreign policy statements?”

    -Of course. Trump, while by no means an enemy of Israel, was the least pro-Likud candidate at the Republican Jewish Coalition meeting in December. He is also insufficiently anti-Assad, anti-Russia, and anti-Iran for their tastes.

    Rubin, at least, is not a conservative, just a neocon. Of course she’d support Hillary over the Donald.

    “The more loquacious alt-right partisans (think Joseph Sobran) use the term as a component of a fanciful alternative history in which Jew-wire pullers Jedi-mind trick Wm. F. Buckley and 1,000 others and act aa a parasitoid wasp on the corpus of the conservative movement, making use of it toward their own nefarious purposes.”

    -Pretty much right. The intellectual core of neoconservatism is strongly Jewish, and its doctrines derive from Jewish interests.

    “Given the current makeup of Congress it wouldn’t surprise me if they recruited Peter Schiff, Ron Paul and other inflation Hawks, gold bugs and internet Austrians to help them form a “devastating” line of questioning.”

    -Unlikely. Trump’s monetary policy thinking seems to be pretty mainstream.

    @msgkings

    “Funny watching everyone parse why others are anti-Trump and ignoring the obvious which is that Trump is an embarrassing, lying, immature, unqualified, unpresidential, racist demagogue.”

    -He’s not racist or unqualified. I don’t see why the others are reasons to vote against him.

    “Like there needs to be any more reason than that.”

    -You pay way more attention to style than substance.

  105. Gravatar of Tom Brown Tom Brown
    2. March 2016 at 17:00

    Overseen in a comment by Neil Stevens (writer at RedState) responding to a commenter to his article speculating that Democrats and Independents are responsible for Trump’s success in the primaries so far:

    The Reagan Democrats believed in a conservative vision for America for all Americans.

    The Trump Democrats believe in a socialist one, giving free stuff to white people.

  106. Gravatar of Tom Brown Tom Brown
    2. March 2016 at 17:05

    Now that Carson is out, I hope he endorses Trump. Good payback for Cruz’s dirty tricks. Plus it hopefully earns him a lifetime spot on Erickson’s enemies list of golden-calf worshiping fake Christians, in need of some Old Testament retribution.

  107. Gravatar of Christian List Christian List
    2. March 2016 at 17:41

    Trump is the logical/rational answer to the Democrats turning away from the (mostly white) middleclass and underclass. The Democrats focus too much on certain minority underclasses/middleclasses. They want to close all kind of “gaps”. These gaps mostly exist because of unjust actions in the past (like slavery). If they exist at all.

    Closing those gaps means nothing else than using unjust actions in the present and in the future. It will always mean that certain classes need to grow faster than others.

    In the worst and most common cases this is achieved by positive discrimination and direct redistribution (like Obamacare). The classes that are treated unjust seem to realize this now.

  108. Gravatar of Jared Jared
    2. March 2016 at 17:49

    Why is it that most of your readers disagree with you? I’m with you in having “Trump Derangement Syndrome”. I’d keep the Republicans from winning the presidency for the next 8 years if it meant keeping the party from turning in to a nationalist socialist nightmare. I fear it’s too late though. Even if Trump loses, the Republicans will just find a nicer sounding version of Trump in the next election.

  109. Gravatar of rick rick
    2. March 2016 at 17:55

    Great Post tho I don’t think people “get” Trump. Trump is the result of a “do nothing Congress”, a President who has “lost his voice” according to the NYT/WP article, and a press that chases (its tail) ratings. I wouldn’t answer the question either just because the press asks.

    Andy Rooney was correct-the press does a pretty rotten job of covering religion (until SpotLight) and business. And in the past they were the so called “vetters”. Where were they when LBJ held the Medicare “spreadsheet” behind his back ’cause he knew we couldn’t afford it? The press does a rotten job.

    See Apple coverage. Tim Cook says it would be bad for America. So is the many billions he has parked over in Ireland. Who is he fooling? He doesn’t really care what is bad for America-he’s playing by the tax rules – he will eventually have to play by the SCOTUS rules-he botched this one.

    Why not give some non-politician a chance?

    I’m for Rubio but I think he has stumbled.

  110. Gravatar of Lee Lee
    2. March 2016 at 18:03

    The journalist who asked Trump to denounce the KKK was making a power gambit. The media says ‘jump’ and politicians jump, especially when failure to jump might be followed by accusations of racism–the media exerts a lot of power of politics this way. Part of Trump’s schtick is that he never jumps. By not denouncing the KKK on demand, he’s quite effectively signaling that he will not bend to media manipulation. Since most of his supporters hate the media and pretty much assume journalists are enemy agents, not jumping is laudable.

  111. Gravatar of Benjamin Cole Benjamin Cole
    2. March 2016 at 18:09

    Scott Sumner and anybody else:

    Well, we are in the stage of comments where Nazis and Trumpenstein nightmares lurk, but how about this from Hillary Clinton in 2008?

    —-

    Hillary Clinton: Obama Not Winning Over “Hard-Working Americans, White Americans”
    05/16/2008 05:12 am ET | Updated May 25, 2011
    1.3 K
    The Huffington Post

    USA Today notices that Sen. Hillary Clinton has begun referring explicitly to her appeal among white voters while on the campaign trail:

    Hillary Rodham Clinton vowed Wednesday to continue her quest for the Democratic nomination, arguing she would be the stronger nominee because she appeals to a wider coalition of voters — including whites who have not supported Barack Obama in recent contests.

    “I have a much broader base to build a winning coalition on,” she said in an interview with USA TODAY. As evidence, Clinton cited an Associated Press article “that found how Sen. Obama’s support among working, hard-working Americans, white Americans, is weakening again, and how whites in both states who had not completed college were supporting me.”

    —30—

    Okay, so Hillary Clinton is not a racist, but Donald Trump is a racist.

    Kasich wants to build more aircraft-carrier groups (offensive weapons systems) to fight terrorists but Trump is the demagogue.

    Cruz says God is on his side, but then so does Rubio. Trump has not painted himself as on a religious crusade.

    Sanders writes that women have rape fantasies involving a trio of rapists, but Trump is the sexist.

    I keep coming back to it: Why does the GOP establishment, or just the establishment in general, hate Trump so much?

    Could it be that federal slush and access and favorable regulation and tax-code jimmies are at risk? Trump might actually try to flatten tax rates and cut out all deductions? Get out of the Mideast? Enforce immigration laws (cut off supply of cheap labor that has not voting rights)?

    Keep an open mind Scott Sumner. Something does not add up here.

  112. Gravatar of Art Deco Art Deco
    2. March 2016 at 18:20

    @Art Deco, do you take issue with Irving Kristol’s book and take on the term “neoconservative?” In this interview he says that though he didn’t come up with the term, it seems to him like “a pretty good term.”

    When it was referring to a specific group of opinion journalists and academics who wrote for a small set of journals and belonged to incorporated associations, it meant something. They had a distinct history, a distinct set of concerns, and a distinct approach to issues and political tribes. It stopped being useful when they stopped being collectively distinctive around about 1991. There is no one knocking about today under the age of 53 who was ever associated with that circle. Wm. Kristol is a mainline Republican whose distinct features are his own, not markers of a political tendency.

  113. Gravatar of Christian List Christian List
    2. March 2016 at 18:32


    Why does the GOP establishment, or just the establishment in general, hate Trump so much?

    I don’t think it’s one single policy goal by Trump but actually what Scott said: Trump Derangement Syndrome. Or in other words: The acute onset of paranoia around the establishment in reaction to Trump. They project all bad things into him.

    The establishment / rich people do not like uncertainty. Trump is the pure definition of uncertainty. People that feel left behind have not much to lose anyway and project mostly good things into him.

  114. Gravatar of Art Deco Art Deco
    2. March 2016 at 18:35

    In my meaning of the word (i.e. “warmonger”), Cheney (& daughter) take top billing, followed by W, Rumsfeld, and they’re all Christian AFAIK.

    Richard Cheney is a Republican careerist best known ‘ere 2000 as Gerald Ford’s chief of staff and George Bush the Elder’s Secretary of Defense. He was a working politician when the Podhoretz crew were still in Norman Mailer’s good graces and Elliot Abrams was president of Campus ADA. The Committee on the Present Danger was never enamored of the Ford Administration.

    Donald Rumsfeld is another Republican careerist whose political life antedated the formation of the Kristol-Podhoretz-Epstein circle. He also put in a tour as Gerald Ford’s chief of staff.

    I’m not aware that Cheney or Rumsfeld has ever associated themselves with anything more astringent than suburban protestantism. Cheney belongs to the United Methodist Church, which is dead center in American religious life.

    George W. Bush was a legacy pol / businessman who was disinclined to be confrontational with the Democratic Party on domestic questions; his signature initiative in 2000 was a prescription drug benefit. He went to Bible studies. Lots of people in Texas do.

    Elizabeth Cheney is a child of metropolitan Washington, where she’s spent 3/4 of her life. Her father was enmeshed in several clots of political Washington as a congressional aide (1968-74), senior White House aide (1974-77), member of Congress (1979-89), cabinet secretary (1989-93), and think tank krill (1993-96). Her high school diploma’s not from a school in Wyoming, but from one in Northern Virginia. She’s a lawyer, married to another lawyer who’s a partner in a firm with a ‘government relations practice’. She’s not a quondam literary critic / rhetorical brawler from the Bronx. She’s uber-inside.

  115. Gravatar of Art Deco Art Deco
    2. March 2016 at 18:43

    but nobody has ever accused Bernie Sanders or Uri Avnery of neoconnery or Marco Rubio or Rudy Giuliani of not being neocons.

    I’ll accuse them of not being neocons. They’re working polticians, not lapsed literary critics. Giuliani’s administration was informed by James Q. Wilson and others who published in The Public Interest, but this aspect of neo-conservative literature never really animated its detractors. Rubio’s whole adult life post-dates the disappearance of the Podhoretz circle as a distinct tendency.

  116. Gravatar of Art Deco Art Deco
    2. March 2016 at 18:47

    -Pretty much right.

    Nope. Absolutely off-its-meds lunatic. There’s a reason that Joseph Sobran spent 15 of the last 17 years of his life living hand to mouth in a house so trashed he could not have any visitors (he spent the last two in a nursing home).

  117. Gravatar of msgkings msgkings
    2. March 2016 at 18:48

    @Benjamin:

    See my post above, here I’ll re-tweet it:

    Funny watching everyone parse why others are anti-Trump and ignoring the obvious which is that Trump is an embarrassing, lying, immature, unqualified, unpresidential, racist demagogue. Like there needs to be any more reason than that.

    You are looking for secrets and complexity. If it’s not obvious to you what an embarrassing buffoon Trump is, then there’s nothing anyone can do for you.

  118. Gravatar of E. Harding E. Harding
    2. March 2016 at 19:30

    @msgkings, enough re-tweeting yourself. I realize that many people, including you, value style over substance. Your loss.

    “I’d keep the Republicans from winning the presidency for the next 8 years if it meant keeping the party from turning in to a nationalist socialist nightmare.”

    -I would, too. Thing is, Trump isn’t the one offering that nightmare.

    “Absolutely off-its-meds lunatic.”

    -Why so?

  119. Gravatar of Matt Waters Matt Waters
    2. March 2016 at 20:43

    I haven’t read any of the comments. But any hard look at the delegate math looks dim for Rubio and Cruz.

    The hope of the establishment was Rubio “winning” Virginia. I put it in quotes because, in terms of delegates, the extra few percent from Kasich would not have helped much. Delegates are mostly allocated by Congressional District and Trump would have still done very well in Virginia. Because of gerrymandering, he may have still won the most delegates.

    Kasich hurt Rubio more in Southern states probably, which had a 20% threshold for superdelegates and award only top two in each district.

    But even without Kasich, and if all of Kasich’s votes went to Rubio, Rubio would have still fared poorly. What looks particularly bad is Florida, which winner-take-all and Trump’s lead is too big. Only Cruz and Kasich dropping out could give Rubio a chance.

    The only two honest ways I see going forward to not have a Trump nomination:

    1. Have only one non-Trump candidate remain, meaning either Rubio or Cruz would have to drop out. It would have to happen before 3/15 for any non-Trump candidate having a chance at 1,237.

    2. The great Trojan horse of the brokered convention. It would be a very expensive fight before then, as the big states almost never in play (CA and NY) become very important. It would be bloody if delegates actually become unbound. Who are these guys anyway? It’s tough to imagine.

    A conservative, third-party nominee seems even more unrealistic. The only way forward is probably for Trump to win the nomination and have the GOP take its lumps with a Clinton landslide. A “landslide” only has to be 60-40, which was 1984 and 1972 elections. Clinton is leading 55-45 now in the latest polls. I think she will have many attacks not available to other GOP candidates and, even as Trump pivots to the center, the pivot won’t overcome the sustained and true attacks.

  120. Gravatar of E. Harding E. Harding
    2. March 2016 at 21:25

    “I think she will have many attacks not available to other GOP candidates and, even as Trump pivots to the center, the pivot won’t overcome the sustained and true attacks.”

    -Trump is a master in the art of mudslinging. He has several attacks planned for Hillary Clinton and the incumbent, which will be very difficult for Hillary to sweep under the rug. And this election season, Trump is the candidate of change. Hillary is the candidate of the Establishment. If Trump can really get his supporters out with a promise to shake up Washington, a Trump victory is well in the cards. The enthusiasm in the primaries is definitely on Trump’s side, rather than Hillary’s. But the uncertainty is high, and I place the probability of a Trump victory given nomination at just over 51%.

    Saturday should provide a good benchmark of how well Trump is doing.

  121. Gravatar of asdf asdf
    2. March 2016 at 21:39

    The funniest part of Trump Derangement Syndrome is that Trump isn’t actually any of the things people complain about.

    Racist: Do you honestly believe this? Do actual racists act like Donald Trump? He’s not politically correct, but that isn’t the same thing (hell, he’s like Obama first term politically correct, amazing how fast that stuff moves).

    Racist would be a step up for Trump, it would his he cared about members of his own race and had some kind of moral compass. I think we all agree he’s a cynical egoist who couldn’t give a fuck about race. In this way he’s a lot like the current establishment.

    On immigration I expect that other then perhaps building a wall he isn’t going to do anything too important. I wish I was wrong about that, but it does seem the most likely outcome doesn’t it.

    Tyrant: When did “The Art of the Deal” become “Mein Kampf”. Are you kidding with this stuff? What exactly do you expect Trump to do that everyone else hasn’t already done. Issue a few Obama style executive orders.

    I’m way more worried about the tyranny of a democrat dominated supreme court.

    Populist: Yeah, the guy that got rich bilking proles out of their money in casinos is looking out for the little guy. We could definitely use more populist policies in this country, but we all know Trump isn’t the one to bring them.

    Foreign Policy: He is one of the few people that might not start a war somewhere. When he told Jeb Bush to his face his brother was a fuckup and Iraq a lie he did more then anyone else in the field.

    So why don’t people like Trump when he’s basically running on the 1996 Bill Clinton political platform with a little Ross Perot mixed in? And when his own background gives zero indications he’s dangerous or idealogical?

    The big secret to me comes from a single exit poll question. Trump does well in almost every category (yes, even the educated and high earners) except one. That question is “shares my values”.

    “Shares my values” could be lots of different values. Religious Christian. Libertarian. Political Correct conservadad. Whatever. What matters is that the person has some narrative by which they interpret the world and an idealogical framework by which they determine right/wrong. It doesn’t have to be coherent or reality based, but the person has to believe it strongly.

    If your values include, “never act in the crude manner Trump does,” then it doesn’t matter what Trumps likely policies are. They could even be good for you. It doesn’t matter, Trump doesn’t share your values, and your not going to vote for someone like that. You might even have strong negative opinions about Trump, even if a Trump presidency wouldn’t matter that much on substantive grounds.

    I think the big dividing line with Trump can be summed up as “The Art of the Deal”. Trump isn’t driven by deontological moral statements. He’s basically a consequentialist pragmatist. He asked “what works” and tries to make a deal. If your idealogical your either say, “this would work, but its against my values,” or you would deny it works simply because you don’t want to face the question.

    I think that most people at most times are consequentialist pragmatists. They talk in deontological ways, maybe they even think that way, but at the gut level what they are most committed to are results.

    There has been a certain mainstream narrative, with its left/right/center varieties, that promised results if people just stayed the course. People described themselves as being committed to their version of the narrative, but deep down they only believed in it because they thought it would work.

    Now that its 2016 and its really obvious the narrative is not working, of course they are abandoning it. They were never committed to it ideologically, no matter what they said, they only really cared about results getting delivered.

    Trump is basically campaigning on “whatever works”. He cuts across demographic and traditional ideological lines because he’s capturing people that aren’t really ideological.

    Trump is unlikely to deliver results, but there is a 100% chance of failure with the establishment, so they are going to roll the dice on Trump even if the odds are as bad as they are in his casinos.

  122. Gravatar of E. Harding E. Harding
    2. March 2016 at 21:50

    asdf, good comment.

  123. Gravatar of Saturos Saturos
    2. March 2016 at 21:57

    TRUMP RELEASES HEALTHCARE POLICY: https://www.donaldjtrump.com/positions/healthcare-reform

  124. Gravatar of E. Harding E. Harding
    2. March 2016 at 22:18

    @ssumner

    -You should really do your analysis of Trump’s health care plan. It’ll be a really good idea.

  125. Gravatar of Mark Mark
    2. March 2016 at 22:52

    I don’t think Donald really thinks a whole lot before he speaks, nor do I think he listens much to what people are saying. He’s like the talkative homeless guy on the bus who nods enthusiastically at everything you say and starts ranting about fluoride in the drinking water as though in agreement with what you just said, even though all you did was note that a new Mexican restaurant had opened across the street.

    His appeal is expertly elucidated by my two favorite political scientists, Matt Stone and Trey Parker: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=FHNk0-7hW3U

  126. Gravatar of Art Deco Art Deco
    3. March 2016 at 05:38

    Clinton is leading 55-45 now in the latest polls.

    No, she is not. The median of her surveyed advantages over Trump is 3.5% and both are polling under 50%. She does not even have a notional lead over Cruz or Rubio, who poll slightly better than Trump.

    There will be no brokered convention because there are no brokers. If you have a hung convention, the candidates themselves will have to negotiate and recruit a replacement candidate (see William Scranton in 1964).

  127. Gravatar of Amaury Amaury
    3. March 2016 at 06:06

    How can living in a cave without give you so much understanding on how our politics work?

    “The course of the policies of the present administration in several areas clearly reveals that whoever enters the White House, even with good intentions to safeguard the people’s interest, is no more than a train operator. His only task is to keep the train on the tracks that are laid down by the lobbyists in New York and Washington to serve their interests first, even if it is counter to your security and economy,” he wrote. ” Any president who tries to move the train from the lobbyist’s tracks to a track for the American people’s interests will confront very strong opposition and pressures from the lobbyists.”

    Bin Laden

    https://news.vice.com/article/osama-bin-laden-thought-there-was-too-much-money-in-us-politics-declassified-letters-show

  128. Gravatar of Amaury Amaury
    3. March 2016 at 06:06

    How can living in a cave give you so much understanding on how our politics work?

    “The course of the policies of the present administration in several areas clearly reveals that whoever enters the White House, even with good intentions to safeguard the people’s interest, is no more than a train operator. His only task is to keep the train on the tracks that are laid down by the lobbyists in New York and Washington to serve their interests first, even if it is counter to your security and economy,” he wrote. ” Any president who tries to move the train from the lobbyist’s tracks to a track for the American people’s interests will confront very strong opposition and pressures from the lobbyists.”

    Bin Laden

    https://news.vice.com/article/osama-bin-laden-thought-there-was-too-much-money-in-us-politics-declassified-letters-show

  129. Gravatar of Tom Brown Tom Brown
    3. March 2016 at 06:34

    What’s going on??? News is all about what’s in Romney’s speech, but where are the deluge of tweets from Ann Coulter telling us what a greasy, steaming pile of fetid, corn studded poo Mitt Romney is??? VERY disappointed!! I expected better from Ann. ;D

  130. Gravatar of Tom Brown Tom Brown
    3. March 2016 at 06:47

    “Racist would be a step up for Trump”

    Lol. That’s all you need to know right there.

    OK, Trump lovers, if Ann isn’t going to tweet us her deep thoughts on Romney, what’s your take (in light of his speech today)? Don’t hold back!

  131. Gravatar of Tom Brown Tom Brown
    3. March 2016 at 06:55

    @Mark, thanks!… I always thought of those scenes from SP when I heard Trump. I’m glad somebody put it together.

  132. Gravatar of Tom Brown Tom Brown
    3. March 2016 at 07:32

    Nothing from Hannity on Romney either! I expect Romney to get the full treatment from these guys: the usual high brow stuff: make fun of how he looks, sounds, smells… call him a loser, insult his family and religion, etc… basically what we’ve come to expect this campaign. Trumpify it!

  133. Gravatar of Christian List Christian List
    3. March 2016 at 07:36

    The speech by Romney is not a wise idea. What is he thinking? Is he thinking at all?

  134. Gravatar of TravisV TravisV
    3. March 2016 at 08:04

    Prof. Sumner,

    I think you’d enjoy Arnold Kling’s latest post entitled “The Two Parties” as well as the Tyler Cowen post he links to.

  135. Gravatar of msgkings msgkings
    3. March 2016 at 08:22

    To all those saying ‘Trump is a showman, he’s saying stuff for the base, he’s not really like that…’

    “We are who we pretend to be” – Kurt Vonnegut (Mother Night)

  136. Gravatar of J Mann J Mann
    3. March 2016 at 11:52

    Scott, your Trump derangement is some of your most amusing work, and I hope you get more deranged.

    The fascinating thing about Trump, IMHO, is that he also is bringing out some of Scott Adams’ nearly best work.* Adams’s defense of Trump is something to behold, and every time Trump wins something, it’s a good test of my preconceptions to explain to myself why I am not significantly updating my priors in Adams’s direction.

    * PS: Adams’ absolute best work is the first two panels here. (I thought the punchline was weak, but the concept is gold.)

    http://dilbert.com/strip/1995-11-24

  137. Gravatar of TravisV TravisV
    3. March 2016 at 12:24

    Prof. Sumner,

    I know you’ve written about Alexander J. Field in the past (the dramatic tech innovations of the 1930’s:

    http://economix.blogs.nytimes.com/2011/04/12/when-hard-times-led-to-a-boom

  138. Gravatar of Morgan Warstler Morgan Warstler
    3. March 2016 at 12:54

    To all those saying ‘Trump is a showman, he’s saying stuff for the base, he’s not really like that…’

    “We are who we pretend to be” – Kurt Vonnegut (Mother Night)

    Yeah You’ll all want to watch this…

    https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=pDLzLUmtU3w

    I’ve written about this elsewhere, but Trump is a known American archetype… in movies he’s been played by Rodney Dangerfield.

    And this won’t mean much to the guys here, but Trump is exactly what being a republican is all about.

    BOSS HOG.

    Big Fish in Small Pond.

    Hegemony.

    We didn’t invest state rights because of some ideology, we invested states rights’ / Federalism bc we ALL F*CKING HATE EACH OTHER AND HAD TO BE IN THE SAME CLUB.

    I know this doesn’t appeal to Scott, but Scott isn’t a Republican, he doesn’t own a car dealership or excavation company in some town with 250K people in it…

    Scott’s BREAD IS BUTTERED playing at being a Brahmin.

    Scott NEEDS Govt to operate as a technocracy to eat.

    If govt is reduced to a loose collection of states run by a powerless DC bc in each state the top 20% make al the rules amongst themselves…

    WHERE DOES SCOTT FIT IN THERE?

    Anybody who loses status in a true union of Federated states, does not COUNT dung conservative discussions.

    More later…

  139. Gravatar of Tom Brown Tom Brown
    3. March 2016 at 14:11

    Good new for Trump fans here (even though the McCain / Romney hatefest cost him about 10 points in the betting odds today, apparently). At least he has this:

    http://www.redstate.com/streiff/2016/03/03/koch-brothers-throw-towel-opposing-trump/

  140. Gravatar of Tom Brown Tom Brown
    3. March 2016 at 14:28

    But a bone for the anti-Trumpers too (from the same author “streiff”):

    FoxNews Decides Marco Rubio Is No Longer Their Candidate

    By: streiff (Diary) | March 3rd, 2016 at 10:00 AM | 48

    Apparently FoxNews chief Roger Ailes has decided the network will stop backing Marco Rubio, and here I thought they were a new organization

    LOL!… Apparently somebody forgot to forward streiff the memo: it’s no longer required for conservatives to pretend Fox News is a news organization. Honestly I was a little surprised by the openness of that admission from Ailes myself… I didn’t get the memo they’d stopped pretending either (I knew they weren’t news but I didn’t realize they’d stopped pretending).

  141. Gravatar of Morgan Warstler Morgan Warstler
    3. March 2016 at 14:41

    TRUMP FAIR TRADE DOCTRINE

    I think you’ll all agree this is the essence of Free Trade…

    1. We must maintain WAR SCALE CAPACITY AT HOME NO MATTER THE LOSS OF EFFICIENCY.

    This means tires, cars, planes, heavy equipment, robotics, software, agriculture, etc at levels that IF we have to go it alone on resources and put all of it to a multi-front WWIII.

    This means we maintain technical superiority – the best newest technical knowledge / abilities cannot be traded by US companies to in order to make sales.

    So Econos who want free trade, like we do, MUST ACCEPT the moral imperative of the population and get GOOD at determining capacity levels needed to go full beserker, so we don’t overly limit trade.

    Once this check box is checked – FREE TRADE!

    2. Well not quite, ALSO to have FREE TRADE, we have to ensure that PUBLIC EMPLOYEES do not GAIN relative status vs the private sector as we ship jobs elsewhere

    This is an easy one – Econos who want free trade, must become INCREDIBLY VOCAL about how public employees are keeping us from having Free trade.

    Conservative REQUIRE your LOUD SUPPORT and votes for Conservatives if you want free trade, so we can cut public employees.

    3. A welfare basket that require work ALL THE TIME, bc this increases the consumption goods / services in the welfare basket.

    Finally WALL

    WALL = Property rights. The argument for the wall is EXACTLY the same for selling off all the Federal Land. Trump zigged here, got burned and is now ready to reward ranchers and RE developers a like.

    Trump sees America as the Country Club for the top 5% of Earthlings. Low skill natives get the best service sector jobs on Earth.

    please REREAD that

    Understand that, contra Scott, Caplan etc who want to run utility hedonics across all humans, Trump measures only Americans.

    To understand this a Libertarian Foreign Policy: BRAIN DRAIN

    Sucking up all the earth’s talent, so their pay doesn’t flow OVER THERE, and they spend their money HERE getting haircuts and yoga lessons etc… is GOOD.

    GREAT is weakening all the other countries bc they have less talent to rely on, making them more dependent on standards and IP and America customs and culture.

    Years ago I wort e biz plan for Gilat to take an old low bandwidth satellite network and use DVRs to DVD burners and down links to bodegas to deliver Lady Liberty TV.

    Basically English lessons, American TV shows subtitled in both languages, lessons on how to get a Green Card, etc etc where the end goal was to create competition for participants to prove they were Americanized before they arrived.

    Right now with refugees (non-top 5%), I think we should make our policy UNLIMITED WOMEN AND CHILDREN. But the women have to come here and undergo intense behavior modification to stay – no head covers, classes on women’s right’s, full English lessons, split the immigrants up so they are not near people like themselves. ALL women must work full time, so their kids can be raised by American DayCare and Schools.

    Make the men stay behind and fight in American overseen forces against the bad guys OVER THERE. Fighting against your own culture has historically proven to reprogram men.

    The men can then APPLY to come over, if they are sponsored by their wives. We will monitor their video communications, so he’s SEEING HER become Americanized. And finally after two years fighting etc, when he arrive he has one year to assimilate as well.

    Like with BRAIN DRAIN, this REALITY BASED policy has tremendous affects OVER THERE.

    Suddenly to immigrate the WOMEN have to be adventurers to head off to distant lands and master the new world. The man stay back and fight. The women GAIN STATUS OVER THERE, we alter their culture –

    That’s the UTILITARIAN GAME RIGHT? Right.

    Soon over there will be stories of bad guys who wives left with the kids and don’t want them around. Men will be forced to be kinder – a win! Men are fighting and being reprogrammed – a win!

    The US is taking 1M refugees? That’s 350K soldiers each putting in 2 years before they can even apply to follow their families.

    Again, if we WANT to have tons of immigration, the population is requiring us to FOCUS ON ASSIMILATION. If we won’t make it our top priority, no immigration for us!

    Stop whining and crying, it’s best to just rip the bandaid off and enjoy the pain, get thru it fast and get on with our lives…

  142. Gravatar of Tom Brown Tom Brown
    3. March 2016 at 15:20

    Morgan, I’d vote for you before I’d vote for Trump… in the general*. I’d vote for either one of you in the primary! ;D

    [*Note that I’d vote for just about anybody before I’d vote for Trump in the general]

  143. Gravatar of Tom Brown Tom Brown
    3. March 2016 at 16:00

    Does this describe “many” Trump supporters?

    There is no doubt in my mind that many of Trump’s supporters are people who made terrible decisions, found themselves in bad places, and blame “the man” instead of themselves. So they will turn to Trump to stick it to the man they blame instead of admitting their own mistakes and taking responsibility for their own actions. In their chronic history of terrible mistakes, they now want to make one for the whole nation to endure.

  144. Gravatar of Christian List Christian List
    3. March 2016 at 16:13

    Trump got 338 delegates so far, Cruz got 236, Rubio 112 and Kasich only 27.

    The popular vote stands at 3,3 million votes for Trump, 2,7 million for Cruz and 2,1 million for Rubio. Or in other words 34% to 28% to 22%.

    Cruz is better than I hoped.

    Kasich and Rubio need to leave. Trump needs to get a heart attack. And ta da: Cruz wins.

  145. Gravatar of Christian List Christian List
    3. March 2016 at 16:19

    “and will be no more faithful to the voters than to the women whose beds he has shared.”

    Do we really know some bed stories from Trump?

    Luckily Hillary is faithful. Bill could f*** everybody he wanted to and Hillary never left him because she knew she would need him to become President. And for that one goal she would really say and do everything.

  146. Gravatar of Tom Brown Tom Brown
    3. March 2016 at 16:26

    @Christian List,

    Ted Cruz is one of those rare individuals I’d vote for Trump over. He promises to be just as bad as Trump + theocracy. At least it’s 100% crystal clear Trump isn’t a theocrat. Trump makes a mockery of faith. So my lineup is:

    Morgan > Trump > Cruz

  147. Gravatar of minty minty
    3. March 2016 at 16:32

    > Here’s what Trump might be thinking; “I won’t disavow or not disavow David Duke. That way I can send a dog whistle to those southern rednecks I need on Tuesday, while still denying it later on.”

    I am shocked, shocked! Oh, the effrontery!

    Take it away, wikipedia…

    > In 1980, Republican candidate Ronald Reagan made a much-noted appearance at the Neshoba County Fair.[58] His speech there contained the phrase “I believe in states’ rights”[note 1] and was cited as evidence that the Republican Party was building upon the Southern strategy again.

    > During the 1988 U.S. presidential election, the Willie Horton attack ads run against Democratic candidate Michael Dukakis built upon the Southern strategy in a campaign that reinforced the notion that Republicans best represent conservative whites with traditional values.

    https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Southern_strategy

  148. Gravatar of Christian List Christian List
    3. March 2016 at 16:47

    @Tom Brown
    You prove my point. It’s not really about Trump. Guys like you hate any candidate from the GOP. Anyone.

    I followed some debates very closely and Cruz never said anything religious that offended me. And that comes from someone who is 100% atheist.

    If you want theocracy go to Iran. Then people like you might learn what terms like “theocracy” and “dictatorship/ authoritarianism” actually mean.

  149. Gravatar of msgkings msgkings
    3. March 2016 at 16:52

    National Review just made a terrific proposal: Cruz and Rubio should team up and pledge their delegates to the other one at the convention. Whomever has the most is the Presidential nominee, the other guy is the VP. Combined they would crush Trump, they already are. They can then campaign supporting each other. Both are so young that the VP could run for Pres in 2024 (or 2020 if they lose)

  150. Gravatar of Morgan Warstler Morgan Warstler
    3. March 2016 at 17:06

    msgkings

    Trump-Kasich wins OH, MI, WI, PA, NY, CA, and FL

    nothing happens in a vacuum.

  151. Gravatar of Christian List Christian List
    3. March 2016 at 17:11

    That’s the first time I agree with you. Cruz and Rubio should indeed team up.

    The case for Cruz-Rubio:
    http://theresurgent.com/an-open-letter-to-marco-rubio/

    The weaker case for Rubio-Mr.X:
    http://theweek.com/articles/609831/marco-rubio-shouldnt-drop-after-dismal-super-tuesday-ted-cruz-should

    Unfortunately not only Trump is a narcissist. Most politicians have strong narcissistic tendencies. That’s why they became politicians in the first place. So it’s hard to see how one of them steps down.

  152. Gravatar of msgkings msgkings
    3. March 2016 at 17:16

    @Christian: that’s the beauty of the Prez/VP thing, the ‘loser’ is still on the ticket and well positioned to run again in 4-8 years. And their narcissism would be served by still competing with each other for delegates to decide who’s the top of the ticket. But it for sure gets rid of Trump.

    @Morgan: ok Nostradamus if you say so. But I agree Kasich is the ideal VP pick for just about any Rep. The betting markets aren’t so sure about Trump sweeping the battleground states.

  153. Gravatar of Tom Brown Tom Brown
    3. March 2016 at 17:26

    @Christian List, I guess I just can’t get over Cruz not condemning pastor Kevin Swanson at the “National Religious Liberties Conference” they both attended in Iowa, when Swanson went on at length about the Gospel demanding that gays be exterminated. Plus anybody who rejects the crystal clear truth of biological evolution might as well be howling about the Earth being flat and it being possible for a man to live inside a whale. Automatic disqualification for elected office in my book. I demand a candidate with a bare minimum of scientific literacy… or at least humility. I don’t want a man with his finger on the button with a head full of apocalyptic rapture delusions. I’d as soon put a 9/11 hijacker in the white house… just another “faith” based reasoner when you think about it.

    I suggest you look up that Swanson speech. Jindal and Huckabee were also in attendance. I question the integrity or sanity of anyone who didn’t run for the door. David Duke and Louis Farrakhan are far less troubling associates to me.

  154. Gravatar of Christian List Christian List
    3. March 2016 at 17:33

    @msgkings
    I agree the NR plan might be the best plan to stop him by now. Unfortunately it’s so late already. Trump should have never been a part of the GOP debates at the first place.

    This plan will only stop him in so far that he will run as an Independent then. Which means that the race for Presidency is decided before it even really started.

  155. Gravatar of Art Deco Art Deco
    3. March 2016 at 17:56

    Trump + theocracy.

    You’ve made ‘theocracy’ into a nonsense term.

  156. Gravatar of Art Deco Art Deco
    3. March 2016 at 18:05

    @Christian List, I guess I just can’t get over Cruz not condemning pastor Kevin Swanson at the “National Religious Liberties Conference” they both attended in Iowa, when Swanson went on at length about the Gospel demanding that gays be exterminated.

    Because Cruz does not have aural or reading comprehension issues and you do. It’s not that difficult to comprehend what Swanson is doing (Biblical quotation) or what his argument is (it concerns normative standards, among other things, not any sort of positive law manifested in a penal code).

    https://generationswithvision.com/from-kevin-swanson/

  157. Gravatar of Art Deco Art Deco
    3. March 2016 at 18:11

    Plus anybody who rejects the crystal clear truth of biological evolution might as well be howling about the Earth being flat and it being possible for a man to live inside a whale. Automatic disqualification for elected office in my book.

    Dum de dum de dum. Evolutionary theorizing is a historical science, not an experimental one. It’s never going to be ‘crystal clear’. See Michael Denton on some of the problems models of evolution have encountered.

    What it comes down to, Tom, is that you’re alienated from people who display certain cultural markers (the signifer is ‘theocracy’). You can be that way, but let’s not pretend there’s anything but pointless aesthetic preferences involved. It’s just that they’re the prejudices of a class of people who have ample amour propre.

  158. Gravatar of Tom Brown Tom Brown
    3. March 2016 at 18:11

    Nonsense term: OK, is “pre-scientific” better? Whatever it is that Swanson believes (and literally rants and raves about)… I don’t want any kind of even appearance of acceptance of that anywhere near a position of power. At least AFAIK, Duke and Farrakhan aren’t currently calling for extermination of anyone.

  159. Gravatar of Art Deco Art Deco
    3. March 2016 at 18:14

    minty fancies he’s being instructive by trading in generation’s old talking points that do not survive five minutes of thought.

  160. Gravatar of Art Deco Art Deco
    3. March 2016 at 18:20

    Nonsense term: OK, is “pre-scientific” better?

    No, it’s not. ‘Theocracy’ describes a governmental form. There’s not much history of it in occidental society outside of the papal states and the prince-bishoprics of the Holy Roman Empire. You had official state congregations in Medieval and Early Modern Europe, but that’s not what Swanson or anyone else trades in. You can find a tiny corps of Catholic traditionalists who use terms like ‘the Social Reign of Christ the King’, but it’s not likely they or Swanson’s sort pay the other any heed.

    Nor is ‘pre-scientific’ better. Experimental science takes place within the ambo of reason, which the Church places within the ambo of faith. Your complaint is not that a given worldview is pre-scientific, but that it is not contrivedly secular or atheistic. Pretty sectarian, if you ask me, but I’m just another godbag christofascist.

  161. Gravatar of Tom Brown Tom Brown
    3. March 2016 at 18:37

    @Art Deco, evolution is a theory like quantum mechanics is a theory like gravity is a theory. “Theory” is as high as it gets in science: “A scientific theory is a well-substantiated explanation of some aspect of the natural world that is acquired through the scientific method and repeatedly tested and confirmed through observation and experimentation.” It’s not a mere hypothesis or conjecture. You make evolution scientists sound like arm-chair Austrians dreaming up evidence free and unfalsifiable rationalizations about praxeology.

    As a “historical science” it’s in fine company with cosmology, astronomy, astrophysics, geology, paleontology and archaeology. And it meets all the requirements of the National Science Education Standards for being a science like any other: observation data, accurate predictions, logical, open to criticism, accurate information, and no presupposition.

    When it comes down to it I don’t care how many centuries people have believed Zeus caused lightening and thunder (or the modern equivalent) or what “cultural values” that might bring to the table. It’s clearly wrong and the “cultural values” (like dogmatism and rejection of evidence in favor of “authority”) enabling the clinging to such beliefs are not positive values at all but millstones around our collective necks. If people want to believe that stuff, it’s of no concern of mine, but IMO they’re disqualified from running a large, populous modern industrialized nation, especially one armed with nuclear weapons.

  162. Gravatar of Tom Brown Tom Brown
    3. March 2016 at 19:40

    “Your complaint is not that a given worldview is pre-scientific, but that it is not contrivedly secular or atheistic.”

    Absolutely false. I was raised on a remote desert government lab where the civilian bread-winning population was almost entirely composed of engineers, scientists and mathematicians. They were also almost all theists, specifically Christians, with a few Jews here and there. What they were NOT were science-denying fundamentalists. I never met a fundamentalist face to face until I was 18, and it took me aback when I did. My dad still lives in that community: he’s long retired, still goes to the church there with his wife, and neither one of them can understand fundamentalist resistance to basic science.

    So I’ve got ZERO PROBLEM with theists (BTW, a person can be both a theist and secular). I have a problem with science deniers, who tend to be fundamentalists, and who tend to be concentrated in the US (at least the Christian ones). Miller el al 2006, ranked 34 countries according to acceptance of evolution, and the US came in 33rd… just ahead of Turkey (the only Islamic country on the list). If people want to believe in creationism, it’s no business of mine, but I’ll never find such a person qualified to be in a position of secular authority in government, especially one like ours that possesses nuclear weapons.

    There are many Christians and theists that I admire that I’d have no problem with being in a position of governmental power. For example:

    Cell and micro biologist Dr. Kenneth R. Miller of Brown University, whose testimony was instrumental in stopping an attempted takeover of science education in public schools (Dover) with theistic creationism under the guise of so-called “intelligent design.”

    “I certainly would advise any fellow Christian not to stake their faith on the idea that this is a problem [abiogenesis] that science will never solve. We have a way of solving these problems.” — Dr. Kenneth R. Miller

    Or biophysicist Dr. Jeremy England of MIT whose done some cutting edge work on abiogenesis.

    Or….

    Dr. Francis Collins, head of the human genome project
    Dr. Robert T. Bakker (paleontologist and Pentecostal preacher)
    Dr. Ian Hutchinson (professor of nuclear science and engineering at MIT)
    Dr. Hans Halvorson (professor of philosophy at Princeton)
    Francisco J. Ayala (evolutionary biologist and philosopher)
    Theodosius Dobzhansky (prominent geneticist and evolutionary biologist)
    Pope Francis

  163. Gravatar of E. Harding E. Harding
    3. March 2016 at 19:42

    Watching the debate now. My ranking:

    1. Trump -Strong responses to tough questions, weak on policy. Obvious demagogue, has inconsistencies.

    2. Kasich -Strong on policy. Probably too moderate and pro-establishment. Maybe even #1.

    3. Cruz -He’s dishonest and a demagogue. Those manufacturing jobs aren’t ever coming back. Clinton seemed most likely to win in 2007, which is obviously why the Donald wrote checks to her. Strong on policy, nevertheless. “Count to 10” was dominant, but in the middle of a light-headed response.

    4. Rubio -I don’t believe he believes anything this bought robot says. Definitely last place. Talks good words, but probably doesn’t mean any of them.

  164. Gravatar of E. Harding E. Harding
    3. March 2016 at 19:52

    Ah, so now that’s why I don’t like Kasich. The nutty Russian and Chinese policy. And his Turkophilia (Turkiye delenda est).

  165. Gravatar of Tom Brown Tom Brown
    3. March 2016 at 20:05

    “Cruz -He’s dishonest and a demagogue.”

    Remember when he accused Chuck Hagel of being on North Korea’s payroll? Lol. Where did he get the reputation for being anything other than dishonest and a demagogue?

  166. Gravatar of E. Harding E. Harding
    3. March 2016 at 20:20

    Steve F thinks he’s pretty honest.

    “Cruz is better than I hoped.”

    -It’s called home state advantage. Very good for Trump/Cruz, very bad for Rubio.

  167. Gravatar of Tom Brown Tom Brown
    3. March 2016 at 20:25

    Who’s Steve F?

  168. Gravatar of Saturos Saturos
    3. March 2016 at 20:39

    New directions in monetary policy: http://www.theonion.com/article/obama-transformed-20-foot-tall-monster-president-a-52471

  169. Gravatar of Art Deco Art Deco
    3. March 2016 at 21:29

    @Art Deco, evolution is a theory like quantum mechanics is a theory like gravity is a theory. “Theory” is as high as it gets in science: “A scientific theory is a well-substantiated explanation of some aspect of the natural world that is acquired through the scientific method and repeatedly tested and confirmed through observation and experimentation.” It’s not a mere hypothesis or conjecture. You make evolution scientists sound like arm-chair Austrians dreaming up evidence free and unfalsifiable rationalizations about praxeology.

    Tom, you have a chronic problem of not being able to listen to what people say to you and imposing your own mental scaffolding over what they do say. Me, this fellow Swanson, Erick Erickson. No one’s saying anything obscure to you.

    The historical character of evolutionary conceptions means it cannot be ‘well substantiated’ in the manner of the physical sciences, and you have incompatible conceptions of how evolution is supposed to have proceeded not to mention adjacent lacunae like the origin of life. That’s their problem. That’s not Cruz’s problem or anyone else’s.

    Your personal history is unverifiable to any of us and well nigh irrelevant to this discussion. I was assessing your actual complaint, not who you hung around with 30 years ago or the number of names you can drop.

    It’s pretty silly to throw around terms like ‘science-denier’. Your complaint is that there are people who are more reserved and skeptical of natural scientists than you care to be. There’s a reason for that. Science is an activity that takes place socially, there’s grant money and reputations riding on it, and academics can be assholes to dissenters.

    And the issues at stake in school district controversies are of scant consequence and Cruz isn’t running for school board.

  170. Gravatar of Art Deco Art Deco
    3. March 2016 at 21:39

    Remember when he accused Chuck Hagel of being on North Korea’s payroll?

    Cruz actually said:

    “He could not even say that the $200,000 he received [for speeches and appearances] did not come directly from a foreign government…It is at a minimum relevant to know if that $200,000 deposited in his bank account came directly from Saudi Arabia, came directly from North Korea.

    That’s not an accusation. That’s a complaint that Hagel’s financial disclosure had holes in it.

  171. Gravatar of Christian List Christian List
    3. March 2016 at 22:23

    As far as I’ve seen the debate:

    #1 Trump – He’s such a strong debater. The whole debate circled around him again.

    ….. quite some space …..

    #2 Kasich – He wasn’t bad but he said nothing with a really lasting effect.

    #2 Cruz – Strong in law, weak in other parts. Sounds and looks a bit like Nixon.

    #3 Rubio – He wasn’t totally bad either. He’s a pretty strong debater with strong debating routines but not much content. He’s a bit like Trump but in a much weaker version. Trump’s speaking technique is really strong while Rubio’s technique sounds rushed, monotonic and memorized.

  172. Gravatar of Christian List Christian List
    3. March 2016 at 22:52

    @Tom Brown

    “I guess I just can’t get over Cruz not condemning pastor Kevin Swanson at the “National Religious Liberties Conference” they both attended in Iowa, when Swanson went on at length about the Gospel demanding that gays be exterminated.”

    That’s exactly one reason why I’m an atheist. Anti-homosexuality is a typical part of all three Abrahamic religions.

    Now to this Swanson guy. One: At least he’s honest about the Christian religion. Unlike so many other guys. Second: He made a statement which reads: Confronted with the question, “Shall we exhort our civil magistrate to implement the death penalty as mentioned in Romans 1 and Leviticus 20?” I provide a clear answer in the final message at the Freedom Conference: The answer is “No.”

    Now to Cruz. His trait is religion freedom. He can not speak against the Christian religion. That would really damage his brand.

    I think one reason why America is so strong is that it only got two major political movements. A right-wing one and a left-wing one. This means that the Conservatives have to take in all the ugly guys from their side and the Progressives have to do the same thing with their guys. There should be no space for other parties. Nearly every voter should find a space in those two parties.

    So what Cruz is doing is exactly the right thing.

  173. Gravatar of Benjamin Cole Benjamin Cole
    3. March 2016 at 22:57

    The Romney speech was amazing, in any other election years.

    He just described the leading candidates in both parties, including his own, as completely despicable and corrupt human beings. At length. Two people you would not trust to running a Target.

    But there are three people in this world wonderfully clean and insightful: Rubio, Cruz and Kasich.

    U.S. politics has completely devolved into interest-group politics. Trump is an outsider. Ergo he must be stopped. Clinton belongs to the other group. Ergo she must be stopped.

  174. Gravatar of Tom Brown Tom Brown
    3. March 2016 at 23:23

    You’re right: not an accusation. I stand corrected. I just rewatched the video of Cruz’s statements. In addition to the above he mentioned “radical and extremist organizations” and “foreign extremist” organizations more than once and “anti-Israel” organizations once as well. All in reference to Hagel. It’s clear he was attempting to imply something there (didn’t Joe McCarthy use similar tactics?). All that was not necessary to complain that Hagel’s financial statement had holes in it.

    “Your complaint is that there are people who are more reserved and skeptical of natural scientists than you care to be.”

    That’s much better than your previous summary of my complaint, which stated I was upset with worldviews that were not “contrivedly secular or atheistic.” Though I’d change your summary slightly:

    “Your complaint is that there are people who are more reserved and skeptical of natural sciences than you care to be.”

    Yes, because the natural sciences play such an enormous role in our national defense, security, economy, and health and well being. But more than that, it bothers me to think people can be making life and death decisions for all of us who distrust basic scientific concepts such as respect for evidence, peer review and awareness of confirmation bias and other self-deceiving pitfalls science is designed to minimize. I don’t want a president that puts prayer above evidence and dispassionate analysis before engaging our nation in another war.

  175. Gravatar of Christian List Christian List
    3. March 2016 at 23:24

    I appreciated the most honest moment of Trump (there is such a thing) when he talked about his flexibility again and again. “You need to negotiate, you need to negotiate.” He was repeating this a few times.

    You wouldn’t expect such an attitude from a GOP guy especially not during a GOP primary debate. But it’s a true statement. It was also one of the main promises by Obama (“bringing the people together”) but Obama never really tried because of his ideology.

    Trump is not really an ideological person so he could really do it. He could really negotiate and bring people together. I think that’s one of the reasons so many people elect him. They want this kind of flexibility. They want “The Negotiator”. A tough negotiator but nevertheless a negotiator. In short: The Trumpinator.

    I also appreciated the most honest moments of Rubio and Kasich when they said that under normal circumstances you really need troops on the ground to defeat organizations like ISIS. That’s a very unpopular risky position amongst all American voters but they nevertheless still say it. Kind of amazing.

  176. Gravatar of Christian List Christian List
    3. March 2016 at 23:28

    In the very end Rubio, Kasich and Cruz all said that they would support the Republican nominee – no matter who it would be. Even Donald Trump.

    That was a huge win for Trump and came a bit as a surprise.

  177. Gravatar of Tom Brown Tom Brown
    3. March 2016 at 23:38

    @Christian List,

    Well, I’m glad we can agree on something. BTW, it wasn’t just Swanson’s statements on gays, but did you see the rest of his bit? Everything he said was alarming (or funny, if you’re in the right mood).

    “This means that the Conservatives have to take in all the ugly guys from their side and the Progressives have to do the same thing with their guys.”

    I don’t agree with that completely: there are limits. The conservatives should kick the KKK to the curb, and the Democrats should have done likewise before the “Southern Strategy” worked so well and the white supremacists were with them. The leftists should likewise kick the Maoists and Stalinists to the curb, as well as the worst examples of post-modernism and political correctness (“emphatic correctness” I’ve seen it called). There’s a lot of room in between, so I agree to that extent.

    William F. Buckley famously was able to evict the John Birch society from the respectable conservative movement wasn’t he? And Clinton had his Sista Souljah moment.

  178. Gravatar of Christian List Christian List
    3. March 2016 at 23:54

    @Tom Brown
    No, I didn’t see the rest of it. It wasn’t funny to me. When I want to watch a pretty entertaining guy I watch Trump.

    “I don’t agree with that completely: there are limits.”

    Yes that’s true. You also named the exakt limits.

    I was a bit surprised that Trump totally disavowed the KKK etc during the last debate. But he really did it. And this time there was no room for interpretations at all.

  179. Gravatar of Tom Brown Tom Brown
    4. March 2016 at 01:11

    @E. Harding, I was curious about Sobran from your interchange with Art Deco above, and I found this:
    https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=KJG0X6V7irE
    He doesn’t seem so nutty there. A couple of the callers are nutty.

  180. Gravatar of Art Deco Art Deco
    4. March 2016 at 03:54

    es, because the natural sciences play such an enormous role in our national defense, security, economy, and health and well being.

    Medicine, agronomy, engineering, and technology do. The natural sciences, not directly, though they can be foundational to the others. Architectonic schemes that can only be verified in a piecemeal fashion, no, not really. There’s a mess of work in genetics which has applications in medicine and agriculture. Do incremental v. saltational conceptions of evolution have any bearing on it?

    He doesn’t seem so nutty there. A couple of the callers are nutty.

    No, he was an elegant stylist. And a mess of a man.

  181. Gravatar of Art Deco Art Deco
    4. March 2016 at 03:58

    That’s exactly one reason why I’m an atheist. Anti-homosexuality is a typical part of all three Abrahamic religions.

    Your viewpoint on metaphysical conceptions is determined by attitudes toward sodomy among people who hold to proposition A? (While we’re at it, Swanson quoted one of the Pentateuch and one of the Epistles, not the Gospels).

  182. Gravatar of ssumner ssumner
    4. March 2016 at 06:28

    jknarr, Trump will bring us NGDPLT? Thanks for giving me a good laugh.

    Jared, You said:

    “Why is it that most of your readers disagree with you?

    I’d guess at least 80% of my readers agree with me. That would be the view of the sort of demographic that reads my blog.

    msgkings, You said:

    “Funny watching everyone parse why others are anti-Trump and ignoring the obvious which is that Trump is an embarrassing, lying, immature, unqualified, unpresidential, racist demagogue. Like there needs to be any more reason than that.
    You are looking for secrets and complexity. If it’s not obvious to you what an embarrassing buffoon Trump is, then there’s nothing anyone can do for you.”

    Exactly, it’s bizarre that others can’t see that. And the “others are also bad” excuse is idiotic, when Trump is obviously 10 times worse.

    Minty, I believe in states rights, and I denounce the KKK.

    Idiot.

  183. Gravatar of TravisV TravisV
    4. March 2016 at 07:48

    Fascinating analysis:

    http://www.politico.com/magazine/story/2016/03/donald-trump-needs-7-of-10-white-guys-213699?paginate=false

    “Donald Trump needs 7 of 10 white guys”

  184. Gravatar of Tom Brown Tom Brown
    4. March 2016 at 07:49

    @Art,

    “While we’re at it, Swanson quoted one of the Pentateuch and one of the Epistles, not the Gospels”

    You succeeded in getting me to find it and watch it again, because I could’ve swore I heard him say “Gospel.” What you write is true, but then Swanson immediately shouts “BUT I AM NOT ASHAMED OF THE GOSPEL OF JESUS CHRIST!!!”

    Another reason to dislike the man: a pastor can’t even keep straight what’s in the Gospels. Either that or he doesn’t care about deceiving people. Anyway, I see a man ranting and raving and trying to whip people up into an emotional frenzy about justifiable extermination of other humans (who’ve done them no harm) based on what amounts to millennia old stories. Every nerve in my body lights up … that’s not what I think of as conservative or utilitarian. You have a different life experience than me, but that’s nothing like I recall mass (or my dad’s church) being like. I confess I’d feel equally alarmed at a Muslim cleric, Hindu leader, Santeria priest or Jacobin revolutionary carrying on in a similar manner. There’s nothing about that display I find the least bit compelling, reassuring, inspiring or conservative. All personal perceptions and opinions on my part I grant you! Pastor Swanson did succeed in making me “feel the spirit” or feel something anyway, and it’s visceral revulsion … not at gays, but at him and his message and the idea that people accept that message. If Cruz is the nominee the Democrats should turn that into an ad or two or three and run them continuously … at least in certain parts of the country where I suspect it could be effective.

  185. Gravatar of Tom Brown Tom Brown
    4. March 2016 at 08:27

    Frank Luntz tweet:
    https://twitter.com/FrankLuntz/status/705626694560800768

    Matthew Continetti:

    “50 years of conservatism ends w/ billionaire bragging about his genitals on national tv. I felt sick. My column.”

    https://twitter.com/continetti/status/705609222759833601

    “The spectacle made me ill. On screen I watched decades of work by conservative institutions, activists, and elected officials being lit aflame not only by the New York demagogue but by his enablers who waited until the last possible moment to criticize and try to stop him. And even then it may be too late.” – M. Continetti

    H/T M.Sax

  186. Gravatar of Michael Rulle Michael Rulle
    4. March 2016 at 09:37

    To SSumner

    and ignoring the obvious which is that Trump is an embarrassing, lying, immature, unqualified, unpresidential, racist demagogue. Like there needs to be any more reason than that.
    You are looking for secrets and complexity. If it’s not obvious to you what an embarrassing buffoon Trump is, then there’s nothing anyone can do for you.”

    The only thing you said here that falls under an assertion of fact, not aesthetic opinion, is “racist demagogue”. How is he racist? Is he more racist than Obama?

  187. Gravatar of msgkings msgkings
    4. March 2016 at 10:15

    @Michael Rulle: Sumner was quoting me there. Actually the ‘racist’ part is the least obvious of the list. He may not be a true racist but he sure likes getting all the actual racists out there on his side. Every other assertion is factual, by the accepted definitions of the words: he is factually a liar, an embarrassment (maybe not to everyone, sadly), immature, unqualified, unpresidential, and a demagogue. Those are all facts by any reasonable definition of those terms.

  188. Gravatar of Christian List Christian List
    4. March 2016 at 10:42

    I bet msgkings and ssumner have not seen a single GOP debate. They read opinions about aesthetics in certain media outlets and act as if subjective opinions are facts.

  189. Gravatar of msgkings msgkings
    4. March 2016 at 10:50

    @Christian: you lose. Are you seriously arguing that we are only aware of Trump through reading about him? That somehow we’ve avoided hearing and seeing one of the most famous people in the country, and certainly the politician getting the most media coverage by a factor of ten? LOL

    And again, every word I used to describe him is factual by accepted definitions of those words. Please show me which of the words does not apply to him. I’ve already conceded he may not be a virulent racist (that is however a factual description of a great many of his supporters).

    It’s mindboggling how these obvious facts elude otherwise intelligent people, proving politics makes us all dumber. Team Red and Team Blue refuse to see the obvious flaws in their team, and in Trump’s case it’s so obvious a child can see it.

  190. Gravatar of TravisV TravisV
    4. March 2016 at 12:03

    Interesting topic:

    http://equitablegrowth.org/must-read-david-m-byrne-et-al-does-the-united-states-have-a-productivity-slowdown-or-a-measurement-problem

  191. Gravatar of TravisV TravisV
    4. March 2016 at 13:46

    Unusually great podcast:

    http://www.vox.com/2016/3/3/11151196/weeds-super-tuesday

  192. Gravatar of Christian List Christian List
    4. March 2016 at 13:47

    @msgkings
    “Are you seriously arguing that we are only aware of Trump through reading about him?”

    No, I said I bet you did not watch the debates. And I’m still saying it. You did not watch the debates.

    ” you lose… every word I used to describe him is factual…It’s mindboggling how these obvious facts”

    You sound really childish to me to be honest. How old are you again? Subjective impressions are not facts.

    You also act like we live in some kind of vacuum. Or like the Americans can choose between Trump, the devil and an army of angels. But they can’t. By now they can choose between Trump, Cruz, Rubio, Kasich and Hillary.

    Last night there was a debate between four of them. Trump, Cruz, Rubio, Kasich. And my subjective impression was that Trump was clearly winning this debate again. I don’t want him to win the GOP race at all but he did win. Of course I could lie to myself and act like he did not win, but really what would be the point?

  193. Gravatar of msgkings msgkings
    4. March 2016 at 14:27

    @Christian: wrong again, I’ve watched Trump in a handful of debates. He’s entertaining and fun and different, and in no way should he be president over the other candidates. Which I agree with you are all pretty awful this cycle. I liked Pataki but no one even noticed he was running.

    What does ‘winning’ the ‘debates’ we see this year mean? These aren’t political debates about issues, these are reality show wrestling matches (something Trump knows a lot about having been very active in the WWE including being inducted into their hall of fame in 2013). Did Trump ‘win’ last night? Sure, maybe he was the most fun to watch again. Does that mean he should be president? Hell no.

    Anyway the childish one may be the one who refuses to acknowledge the facts of who Trump is. I’m curious as to why. The others being terrible isn’t enough to declare Trump something he is not, that is, presidential.

  194. Gravatar of TravisV TravisV
    4. March 2016 at 14:31

    Inflation expectations: Awesome!

    https://research.stlouisfed.org/fred2/graph/?g=3GOW

    https://research.stlouisfed.org/fred2/graph/?g=3GOX

  195. Gravatar of E. Harding E. Harding
    4. March 2016 at 15:21

    @msgkings

    You’re too focused on style, not enough on substance.

  196. Gravatar of E. Harding E. Harding
    4. March 2016 at 15:27

    @ssumner

    “when Trump is obviously 10 times worse”

    -What evidence is there for this assertion? He’s no worse than Cruz or Kasich.

  197. Gravatar of minty minty
    4. March 2016 at 17:44

    >Minty, I believe in states rights, and I denounce the KKK.
    Idiot.

    “Neshoba County is known as the site of one of the most infamous race-related crimes in American history. In 1964, three civil rights workers were murdered brutally by white supremacists, allegedly including a deputy county sheriff, in Philadelphia, the county seat. The crime and decades-long legal aftermath inspired the 1988 movie Mississippi Burning.

    President Ronald Reagan launched his 1980 presidential campaign from the Neshoba County Fair, delivering a speech about economic policy that drew attention for the use of the phrase “states’ rights” in an area associated with the 1964 murders.”

    The dog-whistling that Trump is doing has been going on for a long, long time. I am confused by your overreaction to a perfectly well-established point – see any documentary on Lee Atwater for example. Any Republican strategist in the recent past would have been an idiot NOT to use it to sway huge blocks of voters. But believe as you wish.

  198. Gravatar of Art Decp Art Decp
    4. March 2016 at 19:09

    Minty, if you hear the dog whistle, it’s because you’re the dog.

    Strange as it may seem to you, things happened in Neshoba County, Ms. before a deputy sheriff and a mess of others murdered three members of the Congress of Racial Equality and things happened afterward; the county was founded 180 years ago. The Neshoba County Fair is a community event that’s venerable and well attended with people traveling from all over the state to be there; politicians appear there routinely for that reason, not because Cecil Price and his Klavern were located there.

    And the autonomy of state governments is a matter of concern to people even if you wish to use discussion of it for malicious and dishonest little games.

  199. Gravatar of ssumner ssumner
    5. March 2016 at 13:57

    Christian, You said:

    “I bet msgkings and ssumner have not seen a single GOP debate.”

    I’m not a moron, why would I waste time watching political debates? I actually don’t care how big Trump’s penis is. What would I learn that I care about? It’s not like Trump’s going to suddenly start telling us his views on the issues.

  200. Gravatar of Ben J Ben J
    8. March 2016 at 01:50

    Best part about these comments:

    E Harding, ardent Trump supported, accusing others of caring more about style than substance

    Art Deco, haughtily reminding us that evolution can’t be proven (take that, liberal fascists!!!)

  201. Gravatar of ssumner ssumner
    8. March 2016 at 13:02

    Ben J, Yes, political posts always bring out the loonies.

Leave a Reply