Saturday, April 14, 2018

Impending 2018 mid-term muff

Drawing from a large Reuters-Ipsos polling sample (N = 24,487), the following graphs show, first, the percentages of Trump voters who say they will vote Democrat in the 2018 congressional mid-terms, and second, the percentages of Clinton voters who say they will vote Republican in the 2018 congressional mid-terms (both in a two-way race with those not intending to vote or to vote third-party are excluded):

A majority of Democrats who took a chance on Trump in 2016 are reclinating back home in 2018. A sizable number of independents are leaving, too, as are 1-in-8 young MAGAmen. In contrast, the Democrat line looks like it will hold:

For those who've long been accustomed to Republican chicanery, the Trump glass is XX% full--no new pointless and profligate wars (yet), some tough talk regarding sanctuary cities, Stephen Miller--heaven preserve him--!, the good riddance of a number of swamp creatures like Jeff Flake and Paul Ryan, etc.

But for the crossovers and the restless revolutionaries, the glass is XX[X?]% empty. We're bombing Syria again, the wall remains 0% complete, Hillary Clinton walks free, nearly everyone who rode the Trump Train into the Imperial City has been run out on a rail (except for Stephen Miller--heaven preserve him), the budget deficit is growing faster than it did under Obama, the tough talk on trade remains little more than tough talk, on and on.

What do they have to celebrate? A tax cut for corporations, another infinity-billion dollars for the military-industrial complex, and a resurrection of the bloodthirsty John Bolton.

Trump lost the popular vote by a couple of points and these results suggest the gap will double in size to four points in November without accounting for the motivational edge Democrats, as the party 'out of power', historically tend to benefit from. Virginia in 2016 and then in 2017 is a pretty good blueprint for what 2018 will look like.

When the GOP took control of congress in 2010, capturing a 49-seat majority in the House, the party won the popular vote by eight points. A four point margin translates into about a 15-seat majority for Democrats next January.

If that comes to pass, Trump effectively becomes a lame duck. He's reduced to rule by executive order, with every EO hopelessly tied up in the courts. As we approach the 2020 presidential election the MAGA agenda remains stillborn and that's the end of the god-emperor.

As Z-Man articulates brilliantly--this ten-minute segment is stellar even by Power Hour standards--it's time for Trump to flip over the tables. The president's instincts were to do this when the omnibus spending bill was put on his desk, but he balked.

No more. Trump needs to go back to being Trump. If he doesn't make a big course correction, and soon, it's not hard to see how this plays out.

Whatever happens in the next few months, Trump goes down as a pathfinder, a man who, at great personal cost, blew the Overton Window wide open and fatally harpooned the Republican elephant. The elephant hasn't collapsed yet, but it will. There will be a lot of bleeding out in November. President Trump may have peaked, but Trumpism has not. Its ascent is just beginning.


Joshua Sinistar said...

Oh, what does Donald Cuck care? He figures he can just mosey on back to NBC when his betrayal is over. Much like Lyin Ryan expects to get a golden parachute. Its called continuity bias. The stupid expect that what has happened before will continue. Change is the only constant. Only the perceptive ever really see it coming. The stupid are lemmings that keep going the same way and doing the same things.
Donald Cuck is stalling and doing "business as usual". Like Lyin Ryan, he expects to have somewhere to cash his treason check. The enemy considers them "useful idiots". If they die by the angry mobs, so much the better. There is no honor amongst thieves, you know. The more thieves that don't make it, the more loot for the rest...

216 said...

The fallout from the Charlottesville riot is going to persist far longer than we expected. We don't gain anything from emotional attacks on blacks. Far too many conservatives tie their identity into their sportsball teams.

A central part of anti-immigration politics is the idea of removing foreigners from the labor market to boost the wages and employment of displaced and marginalized citizens. The displaced coal miner was roundly mocked, but the union workers of both races in WI, MI and PA were the real pivot point that flipped those states. Corporate tax cuts don't win their votes.

The lack of "competitiveness" of US business has little to do with corp tax rates, which are now at the same level as the EU, and we have no VAT. It has much to do with the rampant healthcare costs fueled in part by obesity and addiction. The GOP's brain dead idea was to pass literally nothing. The repealed individual mandate was inside baseball. Three-fifths of the country wants Medicare for all.

Trump could trust his instincts here. Attach work requirements, sumptuary taxes on degeneracy-enabling products, limits on unmarried mothers, tort reforms, removing affirmative action in medical schools, and billing of foreign governments when their illegals use the US health system.

IHTG said...

the tough talk on trade remains little more than tough talk

I'm not sure that's true. But just tough talk or not, it's already bumped Trump's approval in the Midwest by 12%.

If that doesn't help the GOP's prospects there in 2018, blame their representatives, not the president.

IHTG said...

216: That might be politically possible...with a Democratic majority!

Joke: Impeached lame duck Trump
Woke: Triangulator Trump?

Feryl said...

"The fallout from the Charlottesville riot is going to persist far longer than we expected. We don't gain anything from emotional attacks on blacks. Far too many conservatives tie their identity into their sportsball teams. "

The Charlottesville thing reinforces a time honored insight: Conservatives aren't worth a damn at street level politics, mass movements, and so forth. Effective organizing requires a group of people who very far to the Left on a cultural and/or economic level. For example, the 1970 hard hat riot actually was between economically Leftist construction workers and culturally Leftist hippies.

Left-wing politicians and activists have much better understanding of how collective action works, and they did a great job of manipulating every aspect of Charlottesville to their advantage. The more Rightist faction involved had few to no elite level sponsors or defenders, and also the conservative faction had a difficult time finding and expressing a collective cause that would elicit sympathy from those who aren't on the Alt-Right.

The Alt-Right's association with civil unrest greatly embarrasses the TradRight/cucks. That's because conservatives are inherently uneasy about causing trouble, esp. the kind that involves melting your ego and your actions into a group-level effort to make a stand. And the Alt-Right actually is much more sympathetic to economic Leftism than the dominant form of Reagan conservatism that's ruled the GOP for 40 years, which as you might imagine horrifies those who've voted GOP during that period.

As we transition into a more economically Leftist climate (no Virginia, tranny bathrooms and such don't represent real Leftism which is defined by wealth re-distribution) the conservative faction is only going to get more hammered and out-numbered as those who demand "principled" or "peaceful" means of solving the problem of greedy elites (or flat out refuse to acknowledge the problem of corrupt elites) will be made to look and feel like fools and toadies for arrogant rich people.

Feryl said...

"A central part of anti-immigration politics is the idea of removing foreigners from the labor market to boost the wages and employment of displaced and marginalized citizens"

Absolutely, but if memory serves Bernie Sanders (!) has done more to expose cheap labor immigration than Trump has. Trump has focused almost entirely on safety and security WRT immigration. The problem is that only so many immigrants are so dangerous as to be disqualified from US residency. Most immigrants are not violent criminals or terrorists or political fanatics in background, and most never will be after they arrive here.

Tucker Carlson, Lou Dobbs, Ann Coulter etc. at least acknowledge the economic motivations of high immigration levels (more cheap labor, more consumers, more growth) and how they hurt the wallets of native born workers. Still, even they stop short of saying that greater restrictions on wealthy people (most of all the business owner class) equal or greater to what we had from 1930-1980 are mandatory if we are to find a way out of this mess.

The vast majority of people over 30 who've voted for the GOP in two or more pres. elections are primarily weirded out by the cultural and safety aspects of modern immigration policies, not so much concerned with how business owners run their affairs (let 'em hire whoever they want as long as the workers aren't Muslim fanatics Mexican rapists), let alone willing to consider Robin Hood policies ("soak the rich") that would bring greater strength to labor (and native born people) at the expense of those who do the hiring and firing.

I pretty much stopped listening to Stefan Molyneux after he praised the last tax cut plan; gee, considering that on almost every economic measure imaginable, middle class and poor people have done progressively worse over the last 40 years, ya might think that eventually some of the supply-side true believers would get a clue that we're way over due for policies that encourage stewardship of labor, higher wages, more pensions, and more savings instead of yet more welfare for corrupt corporations, the corrupt Pentagon, decadent elites, all whom wish to promote an economy revolving around Spend, Spend, and Spend where broad sections of t.he population have no financial security, no bargaining power, and essentially no say in their overall treatment

And the hysteria about Robin hood Leftism destroying the morale of our valiant elites, and destroying the will to work hard, is laughable to Millennials and Gen Z who've spent their entire lives having little to no reason to be grateful for Reaganite econ. policies. Remember that the older you are, the more you benefited from both the Robin Hood era of 1930-1980 and the Reaganite era of 1980-2030 (?). Aging elites need to very careful here; they could well provoke a bloody revolt among long suffering newer generations, if elites refuse to start sharing more of their toys.

Ironically, the Molyneux's of the world toadying for rich people, trying to make them out to be victims, will if anything reduce sympathy for clueless and arrogant elites, who ought to be grateful that they were left alone for 40-50 years. Time's up, get with the program.

The reality is that people who joined the workforce before 1990 got in while the gettin' was still pretty good. The low economics status of people born after 1972 isn't the result of poor moral character (which is what Right wing older people usually claim), but rather, it's the result of Reaganite econ. policies starving younger generations of broadly shared opportunities and annihilating our ability to soundly manage money (for 30+ years, the message has been to spend your money and invest it in risky activities like stocks, yet younger generations don't have much money anyway).

Random Dude on the Internet said...

As I've mentioned before on several entries here, 2018 needs to be the year of action. People were patient with Trump's talk but as we've been seeing for the past six months of special elections, people are no longer patient. Build the wall, deport them all. The laws are on the books and there's widespread public support for it. Trade only gets you so far and the tax cuts wasn't something that the public was kicking down the door for anyway. Same goes for cutting regulation. His only successes are things that people, especially his base, didn't want and wasn't asking for. His tweeting about gun control, DACA, and now the Syria strikes are explicitly unpopular with his base and he seems to be resting his laurels on things either his base didn't care for or don't want. That spells midterm disaster.

The multidimensional chessmasters keep getting it wrong. These seemingly tactical retreats only work if there is an actual victory to be had. Instead it's conjuring up a picture of a guy who can't get anything done, who gets outwitted by the Democrats, and thinks that if he gives any slack to the enemy that they will return that in kind to him.

It's a shame because he's probably the only opportunity left for someone who can turn the ship around but he's not getting it. Not to go full blackpill here as there's still time but time is running out and he doesn't seem to be getting it.

216 said...


After this, I don't feel so bad about confiscatory inheritance taxes on the billionaire class.

Jonathan Centauri said...

Donnie hasn't done what the voters who voted for him want. Parse it however you want, The Lincoln Party is now DEAD. I may not like the D-Party, but their voters get some of what they voted for, it matters not if its in their interest, its what they are interested in that matters.

Its not Trade that made Donnie put tariffs on China. Its the renminbi that is challenging the Bretton Woods Agreement and petrodollar. Uncle Shammy NEEDS the petrodollar to keep borrowing to Infinity and Beyond. Without the petrodollar that Swamp will go broke quick.

This goofball has killed his Party. He does the Banker's wish list and leaves his voters to twist in the wind. He might be impeached or even shot, his treachery will not gain him much. He destroyed his Daddy's good name and lived a shameful profligate life. His Pop sent him to Military School, but Donnie became a "sophisticated international playboy" anyway. The Prodigal Son.

I expect this idiot will also target North Korea. There are THREE COUNTRIES that Rothschild doesn't have a Den of Thieves living on. Iran, Syria and North Korea. Russia and China THREATEN the petrodollar with their BRICs bank and renminbi. Its money. Follow the Money. Donnie and all the cuckers of the Dead Lincoln Party do...

Audacious Epigone said...


If Trump doesn't do something drastic he's going to be hopelessly mired in petty political squabbling through 2020.


My read is that no Dem pol will allow himself to be perceived as compromising with Trump on anything. Tulsi Gabbard may be the sole exception. I'm also skeptical of economic leftism displacing cultural leftism in prominence of place among Dems. Sanders started as the former and was totally whipped and broken into emphasizing the latter to the extent that he could barely be differentiated from Clinton by the end of the Dem presidential nomination. Same thing will happen on a smaller scale in 2018 and then on a larger scale when Kamala Harris leverages it to get the Dem nomination.


Big difference between political wealth and wealth attained through genuine entrepreneurial industriousness, something that zero percent of blue collar laborers contribute to. That's not to look at labor with disdain, or to dismiss the transformation that has occurred in the last half century in the US, but it's hard for me to take too seriously the "soak the rich" attitude because I've worked with lots of people through my career who have made genuine product advancements that make peoples' lives better.

Random Dude,

Exactly. It's clear congressional Republicans are going to deal with him, perpetually, in bad faith (at least the current crop). We could tolerate blowing some sand into the air to sate Lindsey Graham's bloodlust if it meant a wall, no DACA amnesty, and internal immigration enforcement. To continue to give these warmongers things they want when Trump/MAGA gets nothing in return, though, is an act that is wearing thin among many of Trump's most valuable supporters (like Coulter and Molyneux).

Jonathan Centauri said...

The system crushes independent entrepreneurs. You cannot get loans from banks for new ideas. Those sharks that laughingly call themselves "Venture Capitalists" steal your ideas and push you out. Even Steve Jobs who financed everything with Woz in his Garage got snuckered by Wall Street and pushed out. He started another company and it got swallowed by The Dizzy Corporation. You cannot make SHIT without someone stealing it in the Monopoly Money Rigged System.
Steve Jobs could have CHANGED THE WORLD. His insanely great Mac, his iPhone, and Pixar could have CHANGED EVERYTHING. But instead this rigged system STOLE IT ALL and made it into THE SAME OLD SHIT.
All those "regulations" don't protect workers or consumer safety, Pal. They protect THE MONOPOLY. There is no "Free Market". This system is RIGGED FROM TOP TO BOTTOM. Its all ONE BIG CLUB, and YOU AIN'T IN IT.

Its not Cynicism. Its the Truth. Better Face It...

IHTG said...

AE: And yet, you depend on the votes of the white working class who voted in the past for such a party and would now return to it.

Audacious Epigone said...


Yes, they get shafted. They should not be shafted even harder.


Yes, the Republican party should become it. The Democrat party cannot be it again. That ship has sailed. Agnostic thinks it otherwise. I think he's delusional. We'll see.

Feryl said...

" Sanders started as the former and was totally whipped and broken into emphasizing the latter to the extent that he could barely be differentiated from Clinton by the end of the Dem presidential nomination"

Sanders and Trump are the early adopters, making people more aware of genuine reform possibilities. Sanders was partly done in in 2016 by middle aged black women voting overwhelmingly to elect Hilary. As time goes by, the DLC Left will fade from relevance as will the Reaganite Right. Hilary hanging out with Bon Jovi in the Hamptons already disgusts Millennials, who don't buy into Boomer fantasies about being a "rock star". The 2016 election became a referendum on style/persona vs substance, and Sanders/Trump told voters that the post-1980 paradigm was over; we're moving away from cynical photo op culture and into a more wholesome era where leaders are expected to get results which benefit the masses and greater accountability will be possible. Even as Trump dawdles or falters in many regards, he's still a step in the right direction in so far as he refuses to moralize (except when the Pentagon feeds him talking points about various foreign rulers). We can't get hung up anymore on self righteous holier than thou rhetoric, we need to cut through the BS and evaluate people based on the material effects of their choices.

And both Trump and Sanders focused on economic reform (and reducing dumb wars is an economic issues), instead of vapid platitudes with a veneer of philosophy and glossy elite friendly ideology (elites are much more comfortable with haggling over who is good and who is evil, who is sophisticated and who is naive, etc. than they are with rhetoric that strictly focuses on material reality).

That a bunch of pigs like Obama and McCain got status, power, and money in spite of doing nothing to make the average person's life better is galling. But who's to say we can't cut the pig's heads off, eventually? Especially when there's every to believe that younger generations are less greedy. Remember that being a money hungry dirtbag is more appealing to people who grew up in the 40's-70's, when older adults were modest and kept things in check. Whereas people born over the last 40-50 years are sick and tired of greedy assholes ripping people off. Looking at behavioral cycles, I'm always struck by how the kids I grew up around weren't that interested in perpetuating the Boomer culture of the 80's and 90's where the object of life was to drive a better car than everyone else and live in a bigger house than everyone else. And Gen X-ers and esp. Millennials don't care to blow gobs of money on clothes, or making sure that their house's interior is up to date, etc. Many Gen X-ers and almost all Millennials just want to be able to pay the bills and keep a roof over their head, and couldn't care less about Making It to the Top. Sheesh, why would it be cool to do exactly what your parent's did, and go down the road of insecurity and an insane desire to best other people on the most superficial of terms?

Remember, it's all cyclical. And nothing can stay the same. As failure to enact economic reforms gashes bigger and bigger wounds in people, most of all younger people, eventually we will see populist reformers massing huge crowds and protests, and greater levels of labor activism.

Sanders' primary base was under 30 people (not all of whom were white), and had Sanders been the leading Dem candidate he would've also poached a lot of blue collar white votes from the Northeastern quarter of the US in the main election.

Audacious Epigone said...


Even as Trump dawdles or falters in many regards, he's still a step in the right direction in so far as he refuses to moralize

Relatedly, he has also done a great service in not being done in by moralizing from the electorate. In the FANG economy, everything you've ever done is recoverable. We will have to get to the point where, if it isn't explicitly criminal, it cannot be allowed to matter.

Audacious Epigone said...

To clarify, I mean people you've texted, search engine terms you've entered, purchases you've made, etc.

Feryl said...

"I may not like the D-Party, but their voters get some of what they voted for, it matters not if its in their interest, its what they are interested in that matters."

Yes, Jon, liberals leaders are much better at responding to the pressure of the voters because, perhaps, they intuitively understand trends and crowd dynamics better than conservatives who construct durable identities which are often claimed to be rooted in the past (even when said past is no older than 45 years, as with the Reagan paradigm) as opposed to rooted in doing what's most appealing to the current population. Righties are rigid, Lefties are flexible. And funny, The Right brags about never changing. Well, how do you expect to remain relevant or powerful in the face of changing fashions and mores?

When political cycles change from sucking up to elites (as in 1980-2010) to reining them in (as in 1930-1970), the Right is going to be at a huge disadvantage also. In the late 70's lead-up to the Reagan era, mid-upper class people suddenly found they could bash unions, poor people, progressive taxes, and so forth, and their peers wouldn't express reservation any longer at policies designed to diminish the security of workers. Seemingly over-night, The Right found itself in the driver's seat in the Carter era, then settled in in Reagan's first term, then floored the accelerator after 1984.....Who saw it coming after Richard Fricken' Nixon created the EPA and OSHA so as to maintain continuity with the Leftist culture of 1920-1970?.

Problem is, the TradRight still thinks of itself as bold visionaries and crusaders, who didn't do enough to enact the policies which the middle class demanded.................In 1978. The GOP is the dino party, no question, and Reaganism will be the tar pit in which they are entombed.

216 said...


Nothing would wake up the Booomer faster than the destruction of Prop 13 in Kalifornia. That's the American equivalent to Ramaphosa's "expropriation without compensation", and even Jerry Brown won't go after it. A visionary right would form a tacit alliance with the far-left to destroy it, which is one of the few things that can move otherwise anti-white voters into the GOP column.

The long goal must be expelling California as part of a change in the US federal structure to something like the Pre-92 European Communities. Voluntary repatriation is unlikely, and we can't win a fertility race with untold numbers who want the best climate in the world to live in.

Feryl said...

WRT triangulation, The Democrats ran Al Gore and Bill Clinton in 1992, who like Jimmy Carter were social moderates and economic conservatives (though the conservatism of Clinton/Gore was even more intensified, given the changes between 1980 and 1992). And all three candidates were a much different beast than the likes of Mondale and Dukakis, who were rooted in the technocracy and idealism of the 1940's-1960's.

Jimmy Carter was rejected by both sides in the late 70's, as many Americans were uncertain as to the direction of the country. Hell, even Reagan's first election was hardly a ringing endorsement of Reaganism, as Reagan got about 50% of the vote and Independent John Anderson got 6.6% of the vote, which is decent for an Independent. Also notable is that many Democrats didn't like any of the candidates, with Carter nearly losing the Dem nomination.

But as of the 1984 election, Americans became more comfortable with de-regulation, union busting, cutting welfare, cutting taxes, and so forth. So Reagan was re-elected in a landslide over an old school Leftist, Bush won easily in 1988 over Dukakis, and upper class Dems would embrace Clinton and Gore, and the DLC corporate agenda, in a way that would've been unthinkable in the 70's or early 80's. Be that as it may, working class Dems were suspicious, and as such, Perot did well in 1992 and Clinton would never get more than 50% of the vote in his elections. So it's clear that however comfortable upper class people are with the economic effects of Reagan, Clinton, Bush, Obama etc., the reality is that politicians in general have become hated amongst lower class people in the corporate whore era of the last 30+ years. And these bringers of austerity for the masses were able to win primaries and general elections due to higher income voters (who vote more frequently than low income people) embracing the ideology of elite entitlement, as opposed to elites reining it in and being stewards of other classes.

The good news is that a fair chunk of elites see the writing on the wall, and are pushing to have more progressive candidates run. Meanwhile, the appeal of populism is now strong enough to motivate more low-income/low status people to show up and actually vote (whereas in say, 1996, voter participation levels and enthusiasm were abysmally low).

Feryl said...

"The long goal must be expelling California"

NYC was the California of the early 1900's. Immigrants, during a big immigration wave, tend to concentrate specifically in one area. The 1870-1920 waves chose NYC, and the 1970-2020 waves chose California.

The effects of the earlier era are still felt in NYC, certainly in terms of the ethnic diversity and in terms of the resource scarce and crowded environment. California since circa 1980 has obviously been going down that road, also. Much greater ethnic diversity and more crowded conditions are setting up more "battles of the eyes" within the state, as opposed to stress and friction happening just between different territories. I mean, remember Pelosi's stage being invaded in California?

Amongst normies in the 1920's, there was a huge backlash to the perception (reality) that NYC was a breeding ground of poverty, ethnic warfare, and organized crime which greedy elites took a blind eye to as they enjoyed cheap labor. That's exactly what's occuring with Cali right now, as more and more normie natives flee the state.

216 said...


The difference has been now that the high paying jobs are concentrated in the cities, and mainly within very few cities (even certain districts of these cities). The immigrant is eager to accept living with more roommates, as it beats what they had in the Third World. Whites will have to accept the multi-generational household if they plan on not being dissolved. A larger amount of work could be done by telecommuting, but that would impinge upon our control freak oligarchs. I suspect that telecommuting en masse would also reduce the impact of "office politics" which often serves to benefit women more than men.

Jim Bowery said...

As I commented earlier: All young men who identify with the nation of settlers in the US should be volunteering for service as sheriff deputy reservists NOW.

Now for some "hope for the best porn":

I don't know if you've looked into the "Q" phenomenon at all but if not, I suggest you bother.

Next up, according to Qanon: Iran.

Aside from the Qanon Reddit board it might be best to first become familiar with Roy Cohn's connection to human trafficking -- specifically of midwestern boys centered in Omaha. According to the former head of the vice squad for one of America's biggest cities, "Cohn's job was to run the little boys. Say you had an admiral, a general, a congressman, who did not want to go along with the program. Cohn's job was to set them up, then they would go along. Cohn told me that himself."

Quoting Roger Stone (early Trump campaign manager linked to the NXIVM scandal):

Like Stone, Cohn combined conservative politics with an outrĂ© personal life. “Roy was not gay,” Stone told me. “He was a man who liked having sex with men. Gays were weak, effeminate. He always seemed to have these young blond boys around. It just wasn’t discussed. He was interested in power and access.

Roy Cohn was the guy who elbowed out RFK -- a fellow Catholic -- as Sen. Joe McCarthy's legal counsel at the height of McCarthy's influence, after which McCarthy declined and then died. Cohn went on to become prominent in the JBS and then to become Trump's lawyer just prior to dying of AIDS in the early 1980s.

The reason Cohn is particularly important context for the Qanon phenomenon is much of what Qanon is supposedly disclosing is a "rogue" -- although "patriotic" -- military intelligence operation that recruited Trump to run for President in order to clean out corruption based on international human trafficking used to blackmail of prominent civilians/politicians. When Trump signed one of this executive orders, so the story goes, it gave military intelligence authority over all civilian intelligence which then permitted it to take control of those prominent civilians/politicians.

The Qanon drops say that military intelligence has, via the December 21 Executive Order, now taken control of not only substantial black market financial assets funding the CIA black operations, but the CIA itself, thence intel that was being used to blackmail prominent civilians/politicians. They also indicate some of those being blackmailed were being "freed" while offering "no deals" to those doing the blackmailing.

So, if military intelligence wanted to put a President into office who had a personal grudge against the blackmailers...

Remember, these military intelligence guys are likely traditional Catholic/evangelical/LDS/fundamentalist Christian types typically recruited to work as faithful robots -- the way LDS robots run the Casinos in Las Vegas for the mob. These robots, unlike those at the top of their denominations, aren't necessarily all that in love with immigration. Like, maybe, just maybe, after the necon betrayals of 9/11/2001, they see replacing the people of the US as, oh, I don't know -- a national security problem?

Are these guys going to be "dropping" intel that they had the goods on Trump and that Trump "willingly saw the light" and "repented"?

Anonymous said...

Larry Schweikart begs to differ:

Jonathan Centauri said...

Cohn is tribe. Trump is a client that went to Epstein Island. There are no "rogue" elements in Intelligence. They would never get there. They are screened and loyalty is predicated on death for "disloyalty".
This "Q" has been proven wrong already. Much like the Alt-Lite, you are trying mightily to STALL as El Trumpo does AIPAC's dirty work.
North Korea is apparently next on the Hit Parade. AIPAC has lined up a CIA Director as Secretary of State to back up bloviating warmonger walrus Bolton and H-1b Brand Ambassador Nimrhata as they pound war drums for yet another Banker War in Korea. Syria didn't seem to do much. They seem to hope that blowing up the chemical facilities will keep anyone from proving it WASN'T Assad.
The neocons are getting DESPERATE. El Trumpo is not getting over. His fake poll numbers are not getting anybody to sign up for AIPAC Banker Wars. Russia and China are Sittiing Pretty. The Renminbi is up and running. The Bretton Woods Agreement looks about to EXPIRE.



Jim Bowery said...

RFK was a fellow Catholic of McCarthy's. Anyone who thought I might have been referring to Cohn as a "fellow Catholic" isn't even alt-lite.

So, I'm "trying to stall" by saying young men should be volunteering NOW for Sheriff's Deputy Reserves and providing an immediate plan of action to affect things in the near AND the long term?

What's your plan of action?

Argument by assertion ("been proven wrong") and mischaracterization is a poor substitute for criticism, although it is standard operating procedure for "critique".

Jim Bowery said...

By the way, "Centauri", what is the highest level militaryclassified project you've worked on?

Jim Bowery said...

And if you think "rogue" in the context of conservative "Christian robots" in military intelligence means anything other than taking their oaths to the US Constitution seriously -- hence disloyalty to the kind of guys confirmed as generals by Obama's Congress -- your reading comprehension and/or critical thinking is entirely consistent with you bloviates about me "trying to STALL" even as you offer NO calls to action NOW as did I in my very first sentence.

Jonathan Centauri said...

You cannot "Volunteer" to be a deputy. Sheriffs are an elected office. Most of them do hardly anything nowadays. These deputies are mostly doing stuff like evictions and serving papers. Its not even law enforcement anymore. Police departments handle all of that stuff.
Those Pentagon Generals are the biggest yes men in the World. Obama just "diversified" them. None of the cuckservatives did JACK about that, did they?
Nobody has "credentials" in Intelligence. Its supposed to be a secret. James Bond is a spy spoof. These guys aren't going around saying they are secret agents and flashing credentials. In the Real World, its more like the old IMF Force in "Mission: Impossible". Nobody but your CONTROL knows who you are, and if you get caught they DISAVOW and you're ON YOUR OWN. Its a Nasty Business. Black Ops doesn't get reported to ANYONE unless they have clearance. Even your family DOESN'T KNOW.

Jim Bowery said...

Your utter ignorance of just about every salient aspect of the issues you comment on recommends you for the bit bucket.

Jim Bowery said...

I will say this, however: It is probably a good thing that young men who take you seriously not take my advice. The Sheriffs don't need that kind of stupidity.

Jonathan Centauri said...

Oh what's the matter Jim? Am I an uncredentialled fellow? Are you an "Expert" whose opinions demand such uncredentialled people like me be banned and censored are you? What cred have you anyway? Do you believe Trump is "fighting" for your nation? What nation is that?
Not America from what I've seen. There are Millions of White Men out of work. Those "tax cuts" do NOTHING for them. He's all for "Affirmative Action" is El Trumpo. "Celebrating" MLK day he was. Bombing Syria for Israel. Big Friend of "Minorities". He sent National Guard to the border. Is he going to help someone? Is he going to "intercept" invaders? To see they catch the bus to some White town?

Jim Bowery said...

And as for those of us who aren't young men and are interested in dealing with the consequences of losing the grace period that many hoped the Trump Presidency might have afforded before we had to become Boers:

I've yet to see anyone step up and contribute to the project I've set forth to nuke the social pseudosciences, which _will_ be effective. This isn't a run-and-get-your-gun kind of project but it will be far more effective than putting on pretenses competing with the Gramscians in persistent, cohesive mendacity.

Jim Bowery said...

See Ockham's Guillotine

Jonathan Centauri said...

Hah! This guy Jimbo wants you to "argue" with the social justice warriors. What a complete waste of time.


Feryl said...

"Whites will have to accept the multi-generational household if they plan on not being dissolved"

When slavery was still legal, if I'm not mistaken even the Upper South had populations that were over 40% black. Nowadays Kentucky, among other states, is much whiter.

Prosperity cometh before decadence. The Eastern bloc (e.g the Slavic and Baltic states) got shafted by communism for eons, got shafted harder by neo-liberal globalists in the 90's, and only within the last 15 or so years has it begun to gain any kind of traction or strength vis a vis white Western countries (e.g. countries that from 1920-present have been classically liberal and/or fascist).

Spoiled affluent white liberals (and discomfort with immigrants is heavily correlated with socio-economic status) are the ones busy trying to reassure us that multi-cultural globalism is "enlightened", as opposed to decadent. And the lion's share of conservative "leadership" cares more about tax cuts than it does attacking decadent elites.This kind of sentiment is just not possible in times of scarcity. The best thing that could happen to us culturally, and demographically, is for the current labyrinth of ponzi schemes to come crashing down. The reservations that were growing over the corrupt and nihilistic culture of the early 1900's soared into a backlash after the Great Depression made more people sober up. Sobering up is exactly what decadent Westerners need to do. The endless wars, the promotion of pervert degenerates (like trannies and homos), the lack of accountability applied to inept and corrupt leaders in media, government, law, and business, etc. are all proof of too many Westerners being too comfortable for too long.

BTW, WRT non-whites we should hardly be that critical of them. Non-white ethnic leaders demand greater resources so that their group does better. Meanwhile, Western whites openly disavow their own ethnic interests and promote absurd policies intended to bring about some kind of rainbow utopia where everyone magically forgets their ethnic ties and culture. Since WW2 so many of the world's leaders, who often try to give their Boomer constituents exactly what they want (always promote individual rights ahead of long-term responsibilities) , have "liberalized" their culture (e.g., opened up borders, opened up trade, less protection of national culture and traditions). After the economic boom that started in the early 80's, a lot of people thought that we were on the right track. And gee, having lots of money in your bank account, and a new car, and a big house, sure made it easy to believe that we must've been doing something right. That would certainly explain why so many people born in the 30's-60's get so defensive about attempts to reintroduce New Deal style ideas and rhetoric, which older people see as an attack on their current or potential assets and earnings (note: their earnings and security, I guess the vast numbers of incarcerated, indebted, and under-paid people can go jump off a bridge for all the laizze faire set cares). Be that as it may, the appeal of infantile "hands off my shit!" rhetoric is certainly not as strong as it was in say, 1995. How could it be, when with every passing day more of the privileged generation is dying off and more of the remaining people are opening up their eyes to how calloused things get when we only care about ourselves.

Millennials might take a while to be weaned off some aspects of cultural decadence (if that ever happens), but certainly from one country to another it certainly looks as if younger people are sick and tired of affluent and older people polishing their toys, and are ready to relinquish certain individual rights (above all else, society not holding back people from avarice) in the name of a better chance to stabilize society and bring about more widely shared gains.

Audacious Epigone said...


Yes, California needs to go. White ethnics+Irish and white northwestern Euros are a gap that can be bridged (NY). Amerindians and Euro mutts, though--doubtful.

Feryl said...

"The Qanon drops say that military intelligence has, via the December 21 Executive Order, now taken control of not only substantial black market financial assets funding the CIA black operations, but the CIA itself, thence intel that was being used to blackmail prominent civilians/politicians. They also indicate some of those being blackmailed were being "freed" while offering "no deals" to those doing the blackmailing."

Jesus H. Christ, this all sounds a little.......Too good to be true.

If some group of "good guys" is behind Trump, then I don't see any evidence that they've pulled any strings for the better. On balance we still are hurting, dearly, from dumb immigration, trade, and war policies. And that holy trinity is what got Trump a following to begin with, against the opposition of cuck inc. and yuppie globalist Democrats.

There are tons of astro turfers, disinfo spreaders, and sappers running around on the internet trying to further some cause.

I don't reject the possibility that some outfit out there runs operations for the betterment of us all, but if that was the case why hasn't reform of Healthcare, immigration, foreign policy, and trade been allowed to progress? Furthermore, the media has been a malign influence on the public since the early 90's (when Boomers began to make up much of the staff and GIs had largely retired). A sophisticated intel group protecting Trump ought to have been able to tilt media coverage of Trump in favor of Trump, yet the last time the media had anything resembling objectivity toward a president was in the 80's with Reagan. Given how the Boomer presided over a collapse in professionalism in the 1990's, I hardly have faith in any institution anymore.

Trump will not be re-elected, given the headwind into which he is sailing WRT war, a lack of a wall, tentative re-industrialization, and so forth. To suggest that some elite group with great powers of manipulation and knowledge is using Trump as a galloping crusader for draining the swamp seems laughable. Every corrupt institution and lobbying group is still as bad, or nearly as bad, as they were in the Clinton-Bush-Obama era of kleptocracy.

Trump will go in the same presidential file as Carter: presidents out of step with their party and unable to fashion a coherent set of policies that appeal to a lot of people.

Jonathan Centauri said...

This idea of a "Secret War" behind the scenes is just STALLING YOU. The enemy is worried. They have shat in their soup and need to offload it to someone. They want you to EAT SHIT AND LOVE IT.
This guy Jimbo is an Alt-Lite deflector. Like that dude Theodore Beale AKA Voice of the Day. That guy has a Comic Book Crusade for all of you to buy. Mo money, and BUYING TIME. STALLING. GETTING YOU TO WASTE TIME SO THAT AIPAC CAN GET THEM SOME MOAR BANKER WARS.
Syria, Iran and North Korea are Rothschild Bank Free. Can't have that. More blood and treasure to LOOT THE WORLD FOR ROTHSCHILD. Mo Money.

Be Wise as Serpents. These shills are Buying Time and getting shekels from you at the same time. Mo Money.

Follow the Money. It will show you what you NEED TO KNOW.

Feryl said...

"A sophisticated intel group protecting Trump ought to have been able to tilt media coverage of Trump in favor of Trump, yet the last time the media had anything resembling objectivity toward a president was in the 80's with Reagan"

To clarify: the non-Fox News media relentlessly attacks everything that Trump says and does, unless perhaps it involves Neo-con warmongering. Reform/draining the swamp will mean that the media will have to regain the professionalism and restraint that it exhibited in the 1940's-1980's. That may not be appealing to many Boomers and Gen X-ers who want to say or do whatever the fuck they want with no concern for the short or long term effect on others, but tough shit. And it won't make the partisans feel better, either, who want to do stuff like using their sick children for photo-ops (Jimmy Kimmel).

Jonathan Centauri said...

Feryl, the FCC can strip those licenses Today. The idea that this shill media has to be brought under control or bought is BULLSHIT. Their FCC license CLEARLY STATES they have to operate IN THE PUBLIC INTEREST. Even the Left HATES corporate media. If this goofball Trump stripped some licenses, it'd have SUPPORT FROM BOTH SIDES. He doesn't do SHIT.

They don't have to BUY him, he's so underwater with overleveraged properties the Bankers oWn him.

Audacious Epigone said...



Get outta here!

Anonymous said...

That last point about the FCC is actually a good one, and just scratches the surface. There's a ton of things Trump absolutely has the power to do that he could do and should do and would make both Dem and Rep voters happy with him, and he's not. For example, any health care organization that charges differently based on how you pay, and does not post prices prior to service. This is a big chunk of the huge inflation in health care costs - because the HMOs are extorting money from people that they know have money, and squeezing them without telling them what it's going to cost before the patient/victim agrees to it. This happens to be illegal, the Supreme Court has ruled that it is illegal even if health care companies do it, all that is needed is to order the DOJ to arrest and prosecute anybody doing it.

They don't.

Then there's the megacorps, Amazon being the most egregious one. Yeah I buy stuff from Amazon like anybody else, but the plain fact is they are doing explicitly anticompetitive practices that have been ruled as anticompetitive and illegal by the courts in the past. It would be a slam dunk to say "you can't do this, you're going to jail for doing it". And tons of small businesses being squeezed out of business by Amazon would cheer.

Or any of a whole litany of misbehavior in the banking sector, where punishments always amount to fixed-dollar fines which end up being somewhere around 1% of the money the bank made by breaking the rules. It's just a cost of doing business. So of course they break rules right and left and rip off anybody and everybody they can.

The DOJ has the ability to prosecute these people. The President has the power to order the DOJ to do so.

None of this is happening.

Any of it - and the health care thing in particular - would drastically improve the finances of this country, because all that money wouldn't be getting sucked out of the economy and going to pay rent-seekers and do-nothing middlemen anymore, it would be freed up for productive use.

What makes it egregious is that Trump's campaign website actually talked about the health care pricing issue during the campaign. Then after he won all language regarding that totally disappeared. Part of why I've been lukewarm on him from the start: the writing was on the wall from day one.

I don't expect to see a wall. I'd like to be surprised.

Jim Bowery said...

As I said when I introduced the topic of "Q", "Now for some 'hope for the best porn':"

For those who didn't get the literary reference, I had "prepared for the worst" by recommending young men, immediately, volunteer for sheriff's deputy reserves.

Now, I'm not suggesting that people who pay attention to Qanon are jerking off but I am admitting the potentially seductive nature of the phenomenon. That being said, it is wise to have a portfolio of investments including upside potentials -- apportioned according to one's resources and likelihood estimates.

Along these lines, the reason I said:

"Next up, according to Qanon: Iran."

is to point out a way that one might adjust one's likelihood estimates based on whether highly unusual developments follow immediately upon Trump's "crazy" Syrian action.

People shouldn't confuse my statements about this "upside" with lack of awareness of the Zionist agenda that may be behind a military intelligence operation since I did say it was based in large measure on Christian "robots". I grew up with these people and I had folks in my local Nazarene church that had been recruited. They also attempted to recruit my father -- a GS13 IRS investigator of corporate tax fraud -- for intelligence work which he refused due to the potential requirement that he would go undercover and, in some operations, drink alcohol. He'd "affirmed", as a teen, that he would never take a drink of alcohol while attending a Quaker meeting in rural Iowa. This is a guy who had 2 deferments from serving in WW II -- agricultural and religious -- who heard Lindbergh's America First speech in Des Moines on 9/11/1941 (coincidence that, eh?) that Germany's air power was so great that the US couldn't win. He joined the military and tested out a high enough IQ that they sent him to work on the B24. I can tell you how he would have reacted to the betrayals of 9/11/2001, and it would have been something along the lines of what Qanon posits these military intelligence guys are doing: "affirmation" of loyalty to God, Country and the Constitution, in that order.

Anonymous said...

I followed the Q stuff for a few months. I saw a clear patten of clear predictions turning out clearly wrong only to be obscured by more predictions. Classic false prophet behavior. Somebody is having a laugh at all the gullible fools willing to swallow any hope at all.

The sheriff deputy idea is worth considering. I checked my local county. Among their qualifications "Must not have a criminal record."

Welp, I'm out.

And after thinking about it, it's a relief. I actively dislike most of the people I've known in law enforcement. I expect that attitude would filter through.

Alex13 said...


"Trump will go in the same presidential file as Carter: presidents out of step with their party and unable to fashion a coherent set of policies that appeal to a lot of people."

I know agnostic has been pushing that line, but given the current situation we're in, Trump would be more like Nicholas II. We know what comes next, the neo-Bolshevik SJW triumph.

Sean O'Malley said...

The anti-Trump forces are frightened witless that revelations about H. Clinton and Obama misdeeds will finally see the light of day, before the next elections. It is a very big deal and shills like the late night anti-comics are pouring on the vitriol in an attempt to stampede the sheep.

Things are getting more interesting to those who look past the shills to see what is coming to light.

Jim Bowery said...

And now, Iran.

As I reiterated above:

Along these lines, the reason I said:

"Next up, according to Qanon: Iran."

is to point out a way that one might adjust one's likelihood estimates based on whether highly unusual developments follow immediately upon Trump's "crazy" Syrian action.