Thursday, January 14, 2016

The Republican Establishment despises the will of its voters part LXXII

In a slot reserved for rebutting the opposition party's agitprop, the GOP establishment signs off on using a chunk of its time to attack its presidential front runner, and, by association attack the stated preferences of a plurality of its voters:

So eager are the Republicans to elect a new people that they put forward two differing responses, one in English and the other in Spanish. The one in English at least paid lip service to border security and getting a handle on illegal immigration. The one in Spanish didn't even make that feint. Traditionalists, conservatives, dissidents--the Republican leadership not only despises you, it thinks so little of you that it has no problem being so condescendingly duplicitous in front a national audience.

There is nothing republican about today's imperial Republican party. Fuck being a cuck. Trump 2016.


Black Death said...

How nice that both Haley and Diaz-Barlat mentioned a willingness "to abide by our laws.". You are not abiding by our laws if you enter this country illegally, if you remain in this country having entered illegally, or if you take a job while here illegally. All such people, by definition, are lawbreakers. But I suppose that's too fine a point for the Demopublican elites. Go Trump!

Audacious Epigone said...

Black Death,

Right. The insinuation is that our immigration laws aren't laws of any consequence, and therefore breaking them does not constitute breaking "the law". The terminology alone betrays their unshakable underlying motivations.

Dan said...

The scales really fell off my eyes with the Mississippi Senate Primary of 2014, where the Republicans used race-baiting and funded and mobilized Democrats to defeat the Tea Party candidate.

What I want to know is, what other political systems would allow the kind of coup that Trump is carrying out.

Nigel Farage in the UK has had the Herculean task of trying to create a new party from scratch and make it more popular than any other. In France and Sweden, the populist parties did become the most popular but then were squeezed out when the mainstream left and right conspired to block them out.

I'm not sure that exactly the same thing could happen here, but you could have GOPe powerbrokers supporting Hillary. Does Hillary get endorsement of GOP senators and representatives? That would be political suicide if they want to run again, I would think.

I think at bottom, the fault lies with the GOPe for letting folks like Mark Zuckerberg break them away from their base. Zuckerberg is not even a conservative for heaven's sake.

Where to from here for folks like David Brooks and George Will and Charles Krauthammer? Will and Krauthammer are reasonably sincere; they will come around. David Brooks will become a Democrat.

Dan said...

On the other hand, David Brooks is very pro-Israel (his son served in the IDF) and the Democrats are increasingly against Israel. If he sides with his people (i.e. not us) then maybe he stays Republican.

Audacious Epigone said...

The top-down path for a viable third-party is a two-presidential election cycle process at minimum. First, someone has to get 5% nationally, then four years later they get ~$62 million to spend on a federal election campaign. Of course, if it's an outsider from one of the Republocrat parties, if he doesn't stick with it through a couple of election cycles, it's unsustainable. It really requires someone like Farage to have a chance.

Trump winning the nomination has the potential to realign the base electoral support of the two parties, although that realignment will be more one of degree than shifting demographic allegiance. Working, middle, and upper-middle class whites--irrespective of their views on a lot of social issues--in the GOP and NAMs, the underclasses, and captain-of-multinational uber rich on the Democrat side.

If Trump somehow has the nomination stolen from him, I say vote Hillary. Better the Republican party in its current form die than be allowed to pose as the 'natural' home for those not on board with the demographic transformation of the country.

Anonymous said...


You will never capture the minds of upper middle class Whites. None of your WN cohorts will. As for middle middle class Whites, I like them and I want them as my own allies, and they would be wise to choose to live in a society filled with high IQ upper middle class and upper class Whites.

As for lower class Whites, why do you lump them on the Democrat side? Lower class Whites probably have the highest percentage of individuals who profess similar views to Taylor/roof/heartiste/amren/stormfront. I'm surprised that you don't want them. They are probably even more likely to share your views than lower middle class Whites.

I wholly disagree with your opinions on where the faultlines are. There are 3 major social factions in society. 1) lower class and lower middle class Whites. 2) Blacks, Hispanics, Native Americans, Pacific Islanders. 3) Middle middle class, upper middle class, and upper class Whites, along with Jews and Asians.