h/t tony h.
Thursday, January 28, 2016
We're going to find out what John Kasich means by "buried"
Quoted here December 29th:
“If I get buried in New Hampshire, it’s over.”
Kasich is running on average -19.6 behind Trump in New Hampshire and -0.5 behind Cruz.
Shut up Mark Levin you dummy! Trump has reversed Cruz' lead in Iowa in THREE polls ... count 'em
 |
| Poof! |
Donald Trump doesn't need any advice from you, Levin.
At the beginning of January Cruz was ahead in Iowa by 4 in the NBC poll, but now Trump is ahead by 7 in the same.
Cruz was ahead in Iowa by 5 in the Monmouth poll at the beginning of December, but now in the same poll Trump is ahead by 7.
And in the FOX poll Cruz was ahead by 4 at the beginning of January, but Trump is now ahead by 11 in the FOX poll.
Libertarian Megan McArdle is a miserable cretin, a female Henry F. Potter
Libertarian Megan McArdle's got hers, tough nuggies to you if you don't. What a miserable cretin she is.
Here:
"Whatever mistakes we made 20 years ago, we’re stuck with them now. ... I’m not stuck with them; I have a stable job, a lovely if somewhat decrepit row home in our nation’s capital, and a marvelously cheap smartphone manufactured in China. It’s someone else who got stuck with the decisions the elites made . . .."
Mr. Potter: [to George Bailey] Look at you. You used to be so cocky. You were going to go out and conquer the world. You once called me "a warped, frustrated, old man"! What are you but a warped, frustrated young man? A miserable little clerk crawling in here on your hands and knees and begging for help. No securities, no stocks, no bonds, nothin' but a miserable little $500 equity in a life insurance policy.
Wednesday, January 27, 2016
Yesterday Rush Limbaugh told us Trump had to show up for the debate, today . . . not so much
Rush is just as clueless as everyone else.
Here is Rush today, after telling us yesterday Trump had to show up to the debate:
But the rules of the game say when there's a debate, you show up. Screw the rules, he's saying. Why should I willingly give them another shot at me in a circumstance they control, why should I do it? What's the sense in it for me? I'm leading; I'm running the pack here; why in the world should I put myself in that circumstance? I've already seen what's gonna happen.
The depths of The Art of the Deal were there yesterday for Rush to plumb, and he didn't, but today he supposedly did all of a sudden? What, Rush read the book last night? Come on now.
Rush is just making it up as he goes, trying to make sense of it all.
But I'll tell you what. This is what Trump is really doing from my perspective as one who voted for Reagan twice.
Trump is already acting like he's the president. Everything he's doing is in the mold of Reagan. He's going straight to the people every night, flying on his jet from venue to venue like a man driven, talking directly to the people, just as Reagan did every week in his press conferences and in his Oval Office addresses. And Trump's skipping the Iowa debate like the Gipper did and going to the people instead.
That is what Trump is all about -- going over everyone's head, especially the press' head, and talking directly to the people.
That was the secret to Reagan's success, and so far it is the secret to Trump's. Imitation is the sincerest form of flattery.
Trump sees himself as a continuation of Reagan. Both are liberals and Democrats turned conservatives and Republicans. And Reagan had just as hard a time convincing the established right then as Trump is having now.
Just look at the reaction of Establishment Republicans. They hate them both, especially the Bushies.
But the people? The people love them.
Just like Obama, Ted Cruz has been megalomaniacal from a young age
Video here:
“Well, other than that, take over the world, world domination, you know, rule everything,” the considerably skinnier Cruz said back then. “Rich, powerful, that sort of stuff.”
Both have been men in a hurry, using election to the Senate as a springboard to the presidency. That's called unseemly ambition, and Obama had it from the age of nine:
In A Singular Woman: The Untold Story of Barack Obama's Mother, author Janny Scott tells how young Barack - then known by the westernised abbreviation of 'Barry' - was pushed by his mother to reach for the sky right from the start. ... His mother's ambition was clearly not lost on the future U.S. president. When his Indonesian stepfather asked him once what he wanted to be when he grew up, he was probably expecting him to say an airline pilot or an athlete. '"Oh, prime minister', Barry answered,' wrote Ms Scott.
Donald Trump was on to Cruz' character in December when he said:
"I don't think he's qualified to be president," Trump told host Chris Wallace on "Fox News Sunday," adding: "Look at the way he's dealt with the Senate, where he goes in there like a — you know, frankly like a little bit of a maniac. You're never going to get things done that way."
Obama has had very few legislative achievements after seven years, hence the repeated recourse to executive action. Even Obamacare had to be shoved down our throats through legislative gymnastics and without a single Republican vote. It's how such ambition turns out.
Expect the same if Cruz somehow got elected.
In A Singular Woman: The Untold Story of Barack Obama's Mother, author Janny Scott tells how young Barack - then known by the westernised abbreviation of 'Barry' - was pushed by his mother to reach for the sky right from the start. ... His mother's ambition was clearly not lost on the future U.S. president. When his Indonesian stepfather asked him once what he wanted to be when he grew up, he was probably expecting him to say an airline pilot or an athlete. '"Oh, prime minister', Barry answered,' wrote Ms Scott.
Donald Trump was on to Cruz' character in December when he said:
"I don't think he's qualified to be president," Trump told host Chris Wallace on "Fox News Sunday," adding: "Look at the way he's dealt with the Senate, where he goes in there like a — you know, frankly like a little bit of a maniac. You're never going to get things done that way."
Obama has had very few legislative achievements after seven years, hence the repeated recourse to executive action. Even Obamacare had to be shoved down our throats through legislative gymnastics and without a single Republican vote. It's how such ambition turns out.
Expect the same if Cruz somehow got elected.
FOX's owner, Rupert Murdoch, is an outspoken advocate for mass legalization of illegal immigrants, just like Rubio, Bush, Cruz
We had to wait until Debate 6 for Marco Rubio to get one question about his advocacy of legalization in his Gang of Eight bill when all along Trump's campaign has been centered on opposition to legalization.
The debates arguably have been rigged to avoid the issue because the only one against legalization is Trump and the rest are for it.
Trump is right to move on.
Tuesday, January 26, 2016
Trump campaign says Nyet to FOX debate which Limbaugh said Trump was only goosing for more eyeballs
Trump will lose nothing by not participating.
The last Democrat debate had about 10.2 million viewers, and the last Republican debate about 11.1 million. The shine is off.
The debates have served their purpose for Trump, and so has "conservative" talk radio.
Look for Trump to open up a new front in the campaign without them, except maybe for Michael Savage on whose show Trump appeared today, and maybe Rush's show.
Trump's campaign announced he was "definitely not" participating in the FOX debate, as reported here in WaPo.
Limbaugh predicted otherwise today, here:
Now, let me get a show of hands in there. I got three people here. Could have been on the Texas grand jury, for all I know. How many of you think Trump is going show up at the debate on Fox?
All three think he's gonna show up. Exactly. Exactly right. This is called hyping the audience. This is called creating an even larger audience than Fox got when they had their 25 million or 24 million, whatever it was. There's no question he's gonna show up. Well, there might be a question.
New study says trade with China caused severe permanent harm to American workers
From Noah Smith in "Free Trade With China Wasn't Such a Great Idea for the U.S." for BloombergView, who says the public has been exactly right about the consequences of trade with China:
The study shows that increased trade with China caused severe and permanent harm to many American workers:
Adjustment in local labor markets is remarkably slow, with wages and labor-force participation rates remaining depressed and unemployment rates remaining elevated for at least a full decade after the China trade shock commences. Exposed workers experience greater job churning and reduced lifetime income. At the national level, employment has fallen in U.S. industries more exposed to import competition...but offsetting employment gains in other industries have yet to materialize.
... [T]he public might have been wrong about free trade in the 1980s and 1990s, but things have changed. Popular opinion seems to be exactly right about the effect of trade with China -- it has killed jobs and damaged the lives of many, many Americans. Economists may blithely declare that free trade is wonderful, but our best researchers have now shown that public misgivings about these smooth assurances have been completely justified.
This election season remember Mark Levin isn't a Reaganite but a Bush preemptive war advocate
As recalled here:
Lesson not learned, Levin writes approvingly [in Liberty and Tyranny] of what, by all rights, should be the most discredited part of the Bush doctrine:
[A] defensive foreign policy does not exclude the necessity of preemptive action… there are occasions when America has suffered grievously, including on 9/11, for failing to act preemptively.
Obama's poor make an emotional appearance at Iowa Democrat town hall, woman speaks of her shame
From the story here:
SANDERS: I want to hear what it is like if people, know people or themselves, what is it like to live on $12,000 a year, $10,000 a year on Social Security. We’ve got a mic right here? OK. Hold that mic close to you, please.
WOMAN: I’ve been living on probably less than that for a long time, because of disabilities. (Crying) It’s so hard to do anything to pay your bills. You’re ashamed all the time… When you can’t buy presents for your children, it’s really, really, really hard. And I worked 3, 4, 5 jobs sometimes, always minimum wage. I have a degree. I’m divorced, and it’s just, I’m waiting for disability to come through, so my parents have to support me.
Believe it or not, pick any level in $5,000 increments all the way up the income ladder starting at zero and you will see that there is a smaller percentage of Americans making that income in 2014 than in 2007 at every single one, with just a very few exceptions starting after the 99.992 percentile where fewer than 15,000 Americans fight over incomes over $4 million per year. The percentage of people making any given income is smaller in 2014 than in 2007 with the exception of the very highest earners.
Everything has shrunk under Barack Obama, except his ego.
We all have something to be ashamed about, not just the poor.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)