patrick.net

Fantastic. Kissinger is an asshole but a realistic asshole. Much better than the fershnikit Neocon/Hyperinterventionist nuts like Kristol, Elliot Cohen, Robert Zoellick, Max Boot, Nuland, the Kagans, etc. all of whom hate Trump and are "Hillary is Better" than that "Billionaire Peacemonger".

Cohen, an Iraq war backer who is often called a neoconservative but said he does not identify himself that way, said he would "strongly prefer a third party candidate" to Trump, but added: "Probably if absolutely no alternative: Hillary."

In a March 1 interview with Vox, Max Boot, a military historian at the Council on Foreign Relations who backed the Iraq War and often advocates a hawkish foreign policy, said that he, too, would vote for Clinton over Trump. "I'm literally losing sleep over Donald Trump," he said. "She would be vastly preferable to Trump."

Cohen helped to organize an open letter signed by several dozen GOP foreign policy insiders — many of whom are not considered neocons — that was published Wednesday night by War on the Rocks, a defense and foreign policy website. “[W]e are unable to support a Party ticket with Mr. Trump at its head,” the letter declared. It cited everything from Trump’s "admiration for foreign dictators” to his “inexcusable” support for “the expansive use of torture."

The letter was signed by dozens of Republican foreign policy experts, including Boot; Peter Feaver, a former senior national security aide in George W. Bush's White House; Robert Zoellick, a former deputy to Secretary of State Condoleezza Rice; and Dov Zakheim, a former Bush Pentagon official; and Kori Schake, a fellow at Stanford University's Hoover Institution and a former Bush State Department official.

The signatories to the letter is a who's who of neocons and Bush Admin nuts
http://warontherocks.com/2016/03/open-letter-on-donald-trump-from-gop-national-security-leaders/

thunderlips11 says

Hillary

Amazing.

You must be so deeply ashamed of supporting a racist, climate-change denying, untrustworthy and litigious shithead that you can't stay focused on him for one moment.

You probably don't pay any attention to Trump, what with Hillary to think about all day.

HydroCabron says

Amazing.

You must be so deeply ashamed of supporting a racist, climate-change denying, untrustworthy and litigious shithead that you can't stay focused on him for one moment.

You probably don't pay any attention to Trump, what with Hillary to think about all day.

Nah all it means is that all the nuts of the Bush admin prefer Hillary over trump. Now it makes sense why the dems never opened an investigation over the fraud war of Iraq. Trump is the only one bringing it up on the campaign trail. Clintons passed NAFTA and now along with Obozo the clown supports TPP. Her daugheter got 600k+ for what amounts to an internship from NBC. Monica had to give a blowjob to Bill for the same. Funny now the lefties support Bush positions-wether that be free trade, Patriot act etc etc-I guess the actual position does not matter, just who is espousing it.

It's about time somebody asked Henry. Jered Jaden and Brad are plumb out of ideas.

This is a damning observation...

lostand confused says

Now it makes sense why the dems never opened an investigation over the fraud war of Iraq.

This type of inflationary spiral will send Rin to the poorhouse, partnerships be damned...

lostand confused says

Her daugheter got 600k+ for what amounts to an internship from NBC. Monica had to give a blowjob to Bill for the same.

lostand confused says

Her daugheter got 600k+ for what amounts to an internship from NBC

True.

I don't recall you fuming over Ivanka Trump earning 20x that by licensing her name for handbags and tea cozies, but maybe I missed that post.

HydroCabron says

You probably don't pay any attention to Trump, what with Hillary to think about all day.

I notice you did not address WHY these Noted Neocons, Defense Lobbyists and Bush Admin deadenders prefer Hillary to Trump. Is it because they've decided she'll give them more of what they want, while Trump may very well not?

Still waiting for your positive reasons to vote Hillary, so far every post is just "She ain't Trump!".

thunderlips11 says

I notice you did not address WHY these Noted Neocons, Defense Lobbyists and Bush Admin deadenders prefer Hillary to Trump. Is it because they've decided she'll give them more of what they want, while Trump may very well not?

It could also be because they are afraid of putting a man with thinner skin than a 5 year old in charge of the world's largest nuclear arsenal.

Given that he has built a multi-billion dollar enterprise, and hasn't destroyed it in decades after decades, I think we're in safe hands.

Neocons have verifiably caused havoc and destruction, and they like Hillary.

Well, actually he's destroyed it multiple times. And rebuilt it.

thunderlips11 says

Hillary

Trump is meeting with that withered old toad.

I know that the woman you like to talk about is chummy with Kissinger. The point is that Trump is seeking establishment entree, because he is establishment, thus negating one of hs small number of good points.

Is it possible to discuss Trump in isolation? Or is tu quoque the only tune on the player piano?

As sickening as the neocons are, they are loyal to the United States, and not Putin.

Ironman says

Yes, using the legal laws of bankruptcy to shut down 4 unprofitable businesses

They were his largest businesses; his main businesses. Bankruptcies to the tune of 10 figures (twice) and 9 figures (twice).

Big ol', honking monster defaults; massive writeoffs.

There would have been at least one more, but he merged that with other companies after an IPO, so the small investors, who didn't buy that shit, ate the losses without their consent.

I almost forgot to mention one other thing here: Hillary.

I love bankruptcy!

tatupu70 says

Well, actually he's destroyed it multiple times. And rebuilt it.

That's absolutely not the case. The media and the talking points are focused on the casinos, his portfolio is far, far greater than that.

Trump Tower, Mar-A-Lago, Briarcliff, etc. etc. etc. A few restructuring bankruptcies (along with every other casino in Atlantic City thanks to Indian Gaming) among hundreds and hundreds of successful enterprises.

This is becoming a PRATT.

You gotta be amazed at Hydro, he spends all his time attacking Trump, or attacking those who point out Hillary's demonstrated positions as a politician: Patriot Act, endless Wars, etc. He has no remarks about her flops on Gun Control, Universal Health Care, Gay Rights, NAFTA & Other Trade Deals, etc. He's sunk so low as to defend Neocons in his Derangement Syndrome.

What's funny is he accuses many posters on this board of being obsessed with Tranny bathrooms, when this is Time's front cover:

Apparently pointing out flaws in the Media's narrative and mocking that with all the other important shit going on, and noticing the MSM thinks Tranny bathrooms are vital, is an obsession. I suppose we should just leave Moon landing denialists, Day Care Witchhunts, and other issues in peace, even when the Media takes up those swords.

We know what the apparent alternative is, and he's becoming more upset as more and more people realize the choice is between an Unknown with Flaws, and an Iron Defender of the Status Quo with a verifiable record of implementing a Globalist Corporate State.

I'll take the Unknown with Flaws.

thunderlips11 says

What's funny is he accuses many posters on this board of being obsessed with Tranny bathrooms, when this is Time's front cover:

You hate the U.S.

Why do you stay?

HydroCabron says

You hate the U.S.

Why do you stay?

Why do you hate freedom?

Also, when did you stop beating your wife?

thunderlips11 says

That's absolutely not the case. The media and the talking points are focused on the casinos, his portfolio is far, far greater than that.

Trump Tower, Mar-A-Lago, Briarcliff, etc. etc. etc. A few restructuring bankruptcies (along with every other casino in Atlantic City thanks to Indian Gaming) among hundreds and hundreds of successful enterprises.

This is becoming a PRATT.

Wait a sec here. He didn't declare bankruptcy on a small piece of his portfolio. He went under on the entire holding company that includes all of his properties. And his own net worth. If the banks didn't refinance him and eat the losses, he would have been an Average Joe.

thunderlips11 says

Why do you hate freedom?

Also, when did you stop beating your wife?

You denigrate America every chance you get, and shit on the domestic and foreign policy of all its presidents

You hate:

- U.S. immigration traditions
- The U.S. tendency toward free-market approaches
- The existing racial and ethnic diversity within this country
- Everything else about the U.S. which is not like Russia

As for anything you sort of pretend to like about the United States, well, you wholeheartedly support a man who is opposed to all of those thing.

For example, you pretend alarm at federal surveillance powers, but you strongly support the most strident advocate of increasing them.

You have selected the candidate, out of all presidential candidates in the modern era, who is most like Putin.

Every desire you express for the U.S. is in the direction of making it more like Russia.

Why are you here?

HydroCabron says

Why are you here?

You're losing it Hydro. You're now falling deeply into Personal Attacks that have nothing to do with the subject of hand. I'm sorry to see it, it's almost scary.

www.youtube.com/embed/4lQ_MjU4QHw

This whole election season you've become more and more unhinged, very sad.

HydroCabron says

- U.S. immigration traditions

- The U.S. tendency toward free-market approaches

- The existing racial and ethnic diversity within this country

- Everything else about the U.S. which is not like Russia

Like the tradition of skepticism over immigration? Your own post refutes your "US Immigration traditions", btw:

http://patrick.net/?p=1290458&c=1279230#comment-1279230

For the entire decade, most Americans agree with me.

http://www.gallup.com/poll/181313/dissatisfied-immigration-levels.aspxHydroCabron says

Since 1965, most Americans thought immigration should be reduced or kept at the same (relatively low) level. And the level in 1965, one of the most economically prosperous times for all in US history?

The last time the immigration level was this high was around the Turn of the Century, when inequality and poverty was rampant.

Yet as the charts above show, even back in the 60s when immigration was around one sixth of what it is today, still 2/3 - an overwhelming majority - said keep immigration numbers the same - or lower it more

As for California, like much of the US, the "Existing Racial and Ethnic Diversity" "US tradition" is an all-new phenomenon. Before it was mostly overwhelmingly White with about an eighth of the population Black, and then highly segregated by location. In 1970 there were about 7 Whites for every Latino.

Not that I care, because contrary to what the Democratic Party hopes, Hispanics will become White just like the Italians, Jews, and Irish.

thunderlips11 says

contrary to what the Democratic Party hopes, Hispanics will become White just like the Italians, Jews, and Irish.

Are you suggesting that hispanics will vote for reps? Because that's certainly not what the reality on the ground reveals. Speaking of Jews, they are one the most loyal dem voting blocks around (speaking of american jews, not the ones that immigrated from soviet union).

But to get back to Trump - it appears that "economic anxiety" theory does not make sense and perhaps was created to gain legitimacy for the supporters to cover their true motivations. It has been revealed that median income of trump supporter household is in the 70K range while median income of american household is in the low/mid 50K range. So, Trump household is at least 35% higher income wise than outright median which does not match up with "economic anxiety" thesis. There has been some challenges that perhaps Trump supporter household is more likely to be married with kids vs outright median where one may find more single earner households, but still "economic anxiety" does not make sense because a "household" has only 1 rent/mortgage to pay as well as utilities/tv provider services/water bill etc, so the more money in the household, the less "anxiety" regardless of household composition. It is time to acknowledge the "cultural grievances" theory and for the so called "disaffected" to ask themselves exactly what bothers them so much about the changes since the 1960s.

dublin hillz says

It has been revealed that median income of trump supporter household is in the 70K range while median income of american household is in the low/mid 50K range. So, Trump household is at least 35% higher income wise than outright median which does not match up with "economic anxiety" thesis.

Source?

Because if True, you ought to correct the Media narrative:

"Trump rides a Blue Collar Wave" - WSJ
Fifty-five percent of his supporters are white working-class.
http://www.wsj.com/articles/trump-rides-a-blue-collar-wave-1447803248

"Who are Donald Trump's Supporters?" - Atlantic
Non-College Educated
http://www.theatlantic.com/politics/archive/2016/03/who-are-donald-trumps-supporters-really/471714/

Millions of ordinary Americans support Donald Trump. Here's why. - Guardian, Thomas Frank (that Right-wing nut)

I call it a “mystery” because the working-class white people who make up the bulk of Trump’s fan base show up in amazing numbers for the candidate, filling stadiums and airport hangars, but their views, by and large, do not appear in our prestige newspapers. On their opinion pages, these publications take care to represent demographic categories of nearly every kind, but “blue-collar” is one they persistently overlook. The views of working-class people are so foreign to that universe that when New York Times columnist Nick Kristof wanted to “engage” a Trump supporter last week, he made one up, along with this imaginary person’s responses to his questions.

Why white blue-collar voters gravitate to Trump (and Sanders) - Times Union of Albany, NY
http://www.timesunion.com/tuplus-local/article/Why-white-blue-collar-voters-gravitate-to-Trump-7239182.php

"Donald Trump’s Strongest Supporters: A Certain Kind of Democrat" - NY Times, Nate Cohen
http://www.nytimes.com/2015/12/31/upshot/donald-trumps-strongest-supporters-a-certain-kind-of-democrat.html

Rust Belt and Appalachia, ground to powder under alliance of Big Business and the Professional Class.

thunderlips11 says

Rust Belt and Appalachia, ground to powder under alliance of Big Business and the Professional Class.

Rust Belt??

Looks more like the confederate South is his strongest support to me.

Ironman says

Wow, Nice Hydro smackdown!!! He'll need to go hide in the corner for a while after that!!

Aww - Thunderlips made a friend!

thunderlips11 says

Source?

Because if True, you ought to correct the Media narrative

http://fivethirtyeight.com/features/the-mythology-of-trumps-working-class-support/

While Trump supporters are less well off than Kasich's and Rubio's, their median household income is still significantly higher than outright national median. I think we all know what housing/rents are in most of the country as well as the likely take home pay of $72,000 income and there's no way that these numbers add up to "economic anxiety" as the primary explanation of Trump's results.

dublin hillz says

While Trump supporters are less well off than Kasich's and Rubio's, their median household income is still significantly higher than outright national median. I think we all know what housing/rents are in most of the country as well as the likely take home pay of $72,000 income and there's no way that these numbers add up to "economic anxiety" as the primary explanation of Trump's results.

Disagree with Nate - he's not hot this year. For one, most voters in his graphics have higher incomes than the median household income - that's in his own charts. Bernie and Hillary voters are also higher income, and Trump is between the Republicans and Democrats in median household income.

Furthermore, these are primaries, so the numbers are even more skewed. Finally, there is also an age skew. Democrat voters tend younger, Republicans older. Older people tend to have more money. So let's see numbers adjusted for that factor.

Silver is going against all the polling so far this year, and he spent right up until Super Tuesday predicting a big Trump loss, then a contested convention, while not predicting that at this point in the game, Hillary 's lead on Bernie is less than it was months ago

thunderlips11 says

Silver is going against all the polling so far this year, and he spent right up until Super Tuesday predicting a big Trump loss, then a contested convention, while not predicting that at this point in the game, Hillary 's lead on Bernie is less than it was months ago

Silver has been fine this year. He didn't predict the biggest upset in the last century of primaries.

His model has been very accurate in the Dem race--using demographics has actually performed stunningly well.

tatupu70 says

Silver has been fine this year. He didn't predict the biggest upset in the last century of primaries.

He predicted the opposite: Trump was a Troll candidate with no chance.
http://fivethirtyeight.com/features/donald-trump-is-the-worlds-greatest-troll/

Compared him to Herman Cain and Buchanan:
http://fivethirtyeight.com/features/donald-trumps-six-stages-of-doom/

20% chance of Trump Victory too High, sez Silver November 2015:
http://fivethirtyeight.com/features/dear-media-stop-freaking-out-about-donald-trumps-polls/

Second Buchanan comparison after Iowa in February by Silver:
http://fivethirtyeight.com/features/donald-trump-comes-out-of-iowa-looking-like-pat-buchanan/

The reason Silver is wrong isn't math, but the fact we're going through a Party System shift, so the assumptions aren't working like they used to.
As Dan eloquently explained here:
http://patrick.net/?p=1291509&c=1288059#comment-1288059

"The Party Decides" - Silver's idea that party insiders determine primaries - was a book he wrote in 2008 that became a Bible for Political Pundits.

In the past few days, Silver has published a long article parsing several theories as to why Trump has continued to have staying power and, in a telling move, conceded that perhaps his initial working premise, adapted from the book The Party Decides, is flawed. The 2008 book had become the go-to tome for analysts headed into 2016, in part because of its intuitively simple premise: that the political “establishment,” i.e., a group of ideologically aligned influencers such as politicians, celebrities, and donors, hold the authority to direct Americans to vote for one party and to further their own personal interests. “The book does presume that, in part because of their breadth and diversity, American political parties are strong institutions,” he wrote. “Furthermore, it assumes that strong, highly functional parties are able to make presidential nominations that further the party’s best interest.”

The GOP Insiders flat out lost, and the Dem Insiders, while they haven't failed (yet?) are nowhere near as powerful as they used or hoped to be.

I gotta say this again and again: Hillary can't clearly shove aside a Rural State Socialist Jew who was her only real nomination opponent.

thunderlips11 says

He predicted the opposite: Trump was a Troll candidate with no chance.

Yep--he is a troll candidate. That's why it's all the more shocking that he won.

I thought Kissinger was a head on a pillow these days. He'll yell at anybody who gets too close to his Hoveround.