The New Trump (likes Muslims, Mexicans and trade deals)
No, this is not from The Onion:
Presumptive Republican presidential nominee Donald Trump said on Saturday that he wouldn’t characterize his immigration policies as including “mass deportations,” drawing a sharp retort from the campaign of Democrat Hillary Clinton.
Trump, in an interview at his golf course in Aberdeenshire, Scotland, said that rather than a blanket ban on Muslims coming to the U.S., a position he took in late 2015, he’d focus on those from countries with links to terrorists. The Republican also said he would start from scratch on the sweeping Trans-Pacific Partnership trade pact.
Trump said his immigration policies would have “heart,” suggesting he may be shifting tone to transition into general-election mode after the bruising primary season.
“President Obama has mass deported vast numbers of people — the most ever, and it’s never reported. I think people are going to find that I have not only the best policies, but I will have the biggest heart of anybody,” Trump said.Pressed on whether he would issue “mass deportations,” Trump answered: “No, I would not call it mass deportations.”
I’m sure my neo-Nazi commenters will be thrilled to learn that on immigration Trump will have an even bigger heart than Obama. It’s a pity that the Supreme Court doesn’t have a heart as big as Trump’s. So which illegals will he deport?
Trump, 70, continued eating fish and chips at his golf course’s clubhouse before adding: “We are going to get rid of a lot of bad dudes who are here,” he said. “That I can tell you.”
I’d guess that even Bryan Caplan could support that. And exactly which Muslims will Trump stop from coming into the country?
Earlier Saturday, Trump told reporters that he’d seek to restrict people from unspecified “terrorist countries” from entering the U.S. It marked a shift from a news release on Dec. 7 saying that, if elected, Trump wanted “a total and complete shutdown of Muslims entering the United States.”
There were an estimated 1.6 billion Muslims in the world as of 2010, or about 23 percent of the world’s population, according to the Pew Research Center.
‘Specific’ Countries
“I want terrorists out. I want people that have bad thoughts out.
Perhaps he’ll have the INS develop a new form for immigrants to fill out. Check one of the three boxes:
1. Terrorist _____
2. Person with bad thoughts _______
3. Good Muslim _______
And he’s suddenly a fan of trade deals that steal jobs from America’s blue color workers, he just wants them one country at a time:
On the TPP, the trade agreement signed this year by 12 Pacific Rim countries, Trump said he would prefer bilateral talks.
‘So Complicated’
“I like the idea of making deals with individual countries. They put in these vast number of countries and it gets so complicated and it’s more than 6,000 pages,” Trump said.
From the beginning, I’ve said that Trump’s words mean nothing, it’s just like the babble coming out of the mouth of a baby. What continues to amaze me is that his fans seem to think that he’s one of them. Are they in for a big surprise!
If elected, Trump may well try to bend over backwards to prove he’s not a racist, and end up loosening our immigrations laws so much that immigration increases. Or he may not.
Since he claims that his heart is bigger than Hillary’s, he may spend even more on social programs, or he may not. If you are Republican that plans to vote for Trump as a way of stopping Hillary, this is exactly what you are voting for:
HT: Tom Brown
Tags:
26. June 2016 at 10:33
Thanks for the H/T Scott.
26. June 2016 at 10:34
… BTW, do you think there’ll be a betting market on Article 50 actually being invoked?
26. June 2016 at 10:46
Bob Loblaw blah blah blah
26. June 2016 at 10:48
I’m sure my neo-Nazi commenters will be thrilled to learn that on immigration Trump will have an even bigger heart than Obama. It’s a pity that the Supreme Court doesn’t have a heart as big as Trump’s. So which illegals will he deport?
Bwhahaha!… Well, maybe they’ve just fallen in loooove with that unbeatable Trump personality and style. Sooo alpha!
26. June 2016 at 11:05
Cuck, “Not Trump” is not a candidate. All the candidates were worse than Trump. Maybe if you’d have endorsed a candidate in the Republican primaries, cucks, someone would have listened to your tripe.
Did Trump not explicitly say “I love Hispanics”?
Roll the dice!
Make America Great Again!
26. June 2016 at 11:08
Scott, maybe your die-hard pro-Trump commentators have whatever it is that’s afflicting poor Sean Hannity here:
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=aiZO5db5Eys
(you can see it in his eyes)
26. June 2016 at 11:22
Look, if you wanna be an advisor to Trump, go ahead, I’m not stopping ya.
Make America Great Again!
26. June 2016 at 11:57
Anyone else starting to wonder if “E. Harding” is some sort of parody?
26. June 2016 at 12:10
Anyone else starting to wonder if “E. Harding” is some sort of parody?
You have here a 60 year old professor who cannot deal straight with any non-faculty member to save his life and lobs insults quite gratuitously. You have two or three other chums continually preening about how clever they are while offering irrelevancies (hey, look at this, obscure Republican columnist you never heard of hates Trump). I’m just too distracted to notice any of E. Harding’s abrasions.
26. June 2016 at 12:12
Since he claims that his heart is bigger than Hillary’s
That’s a claim anyone but the meanest prison inmate could credibly make.
26. June 2016 at 12:13
Tom, Great video!
Harding, Don’t you think there’s something pathetic about your continued support for Trump, even as he caves on the immigration issue that you insisted is all important?
Suppose Trump said that all Alt-Right blog commenters should be rounded up and put in concentration camps. Would your response still be:
Make America Great Again!
26. June 2016 at 12:31
Tom, Great video!
Glad you liked it, but which one? Hannity’s Look of Love or the Brexit related one?
Regarding Trump’s statement here:
“President Obama has mass deported vast numbers of people — the most ever, and it’s never reported. I think people are going to find that I have not only the best policies, but I will have the biggest heart of anybody,”
Ooooo, somebody needs to let committed Branch Trumpidian Ann Coulter know: she’s still retweeting stuff like this. She needs to download Trump 27.4; she’s apparently still running Trump 8.3 or earlier. But be gentle!… you know, cognitive dissonance and all can be hard on a “lady” her age, swooning like a 12 year old in the presence of sooo much raw Alpha.
26. June 2016 at 12:49
“It’s a pity that the Supreme Court doesn’t have a heart as big as Trump’s.”
Lady justice wears a blindfold, precisely because she is supposed to fairly and objectively apply written law, not to “have heart”.
If Trump is really so pro-amnesty and pro-immigration, then I imagine Bryan Caplan will lend him his full support?
No, Caplan will continue to lose sleep about Trump and the “neo-nazi” types that support anything less than full, complete, perpetual amnesty accompanied by full cradle to grave social services will support Trump.
Most normal humans throughout the history of mankind have not supported perpetual blanket amnesty or mass open borders.
It also baffles me how someone could consider national borders to be a birth lottery draconian system of unjust privilege, yet not make the same claim about birthright lottery nuclear families.
26. June 2016 at 12:52
Scott, BTW, it looks like you’re being addressed as “Cuck” now… does that mean you’re perceived as being willing to look the other way while “mud people” commit racially unhygienic acts with pure white women?
African Americans back to Africa!
Mexican Americans back to Mexico!
Native Americans back to Native America!
Make America Grate Again!
26. June 2016 at 13:06
Oh for Pete’s sake, you do not have any “neo-nazi” commentators. Stop slandering people because they do not agree with your leftist/globalist nonsense.
You are the one behaving like a Nazi
26. June 2016 at 13:53
“Don’t you think there’s something pathetic about your continued support for Trump, even as he caves on the immigration issue that you insisted is all important?”
-I never said Trump was the platonic epitome of the ideal candidate. I have said he’s the best candidate. OK? Here’s the deal with Trump:
1. At worst, his judges will be Nixon appointees. Hillary’s best is worse.
2. At worst, he will only deport 2 million illegals, instead of 11 million. Hillary’s best is continue present Obama policies (get-out-of-jail-free cards for 5 million), which is worse.
3. At worst, he will torture 4000 suspected terrorists. At worst, Clinton will torture only a few dozen. Clinton may be better on this issue, but noone can say.
4. Trump has said he’d have good relations with Russia. Hillary has given zero indication of this; in fact, just the opposite. She also has said she supports a “no-fly-zone” in Syria; an idiotic proposal only an idiot or evildoer could countenance. Clinton may be better on this issue, but the evidence is slim to none.
And so on, and so forth. Sure, the trade policy is bad. And the surveillance policy. And the corn subsidy policy. And the inconsistency and incoherence. But who has ever accused Clinton of consistency, being opposed to corn subsidies, being an enemy of mass surveillance, or a champion of free trade?
The most important decision a President will make next year is which SC Justice to appoint. Trump’s first go-to was the Federalist Society. Clinton condemned the Supreme Court’s decision on Obamnesty. That Supreme Court decision was condemned by all the liberals of the court and praised by most of the liberals in public. Clinton loudly opposed it. That’s what I’m scared of. Hillary will destroy the Constitution permanently and totally. Trump will preserve some vestige of it.
“Suppose Trump said that all Alt-Right blog commenters should be rounded up and put in concentration camps. Would your response still be:
Make America Great Again!”
-My response is:
Who’s the alternative?
BTW, I will go #NeverTrump if he chooses Christie or Cotton as Veep. Both are Nazis.
26. June 2016 at 14:35
This has got to be the only good thing about Trump. This is a moment for right wing nationalism worldwide and our right wing nationalist is just great at pretending to be one.
26. June 2016 at 14:45
“BTW, I will go #NeverTrump if he chooses Christie or Cotton as Veep. Both are Nazis.”
Good to hear that there’s a definite threshold. But what about if he chooses this guy (Daniel Carver) [1] [2]?
And regarding the Supreme Court, don’t you think that McConnell will change his tune on Merrick Garland the day after a Clinton victory this November?
Of course, there are rumors that Clarence Thomas might retire next year as well… but it looks like we can live with eight justices just fine.
26. June 2016 at 14:51
So, demagogue then. It is way past time to separate the idea of The Donald as revolt against whatever from the actual The Donald right in from of us.
Unfortunately, since politics is increasingly about what folk are against, The Donald -demagogue will continue to have traction.
http://www.the-american-interest.com/2016/06/23/negative-partisanship-rises/
26. June 2016 at 15:19
Dear Scott. A few pointers:
1) By now you should have figured out that calling people racist, sexist bla bla bla (insert usual list of insults the Left throws against anyone they disagree with)…doesn’t work.
2) By now, you should have at least be getting an uneasy feeling in your stomach over the immigration and “inclusion” and “diversity” platforms of the Left. I mean, after Orlando, they blamed: Republicans, Christians, NRA, guns etc. Never dared utter the name of the real evil. I know you’re on a close enough page with someone like Bryan Caplan, and I certainly would never expect Bryan Caplan to have a reasonable thought in his mind…but from you, I’d expect at least a BIT of self-reflection at this point.
3) By now, you should have figured out that straw-man arguments may not be the most convincing on this issue. Saying “well we’ll just have the INS ask them if they’re terrorists”, is a good joke, but you can’t really think its a serious argument?
We have people on terrorist watch lists, we have criminal aliens who are in and out of jails etc. You know…what’s is unrealistic or even “displeasing” to you about, say, deporting immigrants who make constant threats of terrorism and who support ISIS or AQ? Is that…an unreasonable suggestion? Why do we have a terrorist watch list, an FBI etc.? Excuse me for being a bit disgusted at the dereliction of duty here. I know…how racist of me.
4) By now, we’re essentially left with the choice that the Dems have brought us: open up your borders to any and all, including any and all lowlifes, and you better love it and embrace it and God Damn you racists if you complain!….and Trump.
Now, as a serious and intelligent person, you ought to be asking yourself whether this vision that the Left and the Dems (and the left in Europe too) adheres to, is something that is any…LESS…insane…than Trumps wishy-washy position?
Now, I’m no Turmp fan whatsoever. I despise him. I’m a Republican and as you say, he’s nothing of the sort.
And I AM an IMMIGRANT to this country, and I’m all for immigration. I just think that maybe, you know, you could try…choosing the best, and not intentionally getting the worst people you can find.
But on the other hand…
…excuse me for being disgusted with the Dems calling me a RACIST because I think terrorist-supporting aliens ought to GTFO of this country.
5) So if you haven’t figured it out yet, there’s probably a nice middle ground between the insanity of the Left and the insanity of the alt-right (you seem to think only one side is insane here). Failing to acknowledge that assuming anything short of Bryan Caplan level of absurdity is the equivalent of racist Nazis…is probably not a good long-term strategy.
26. June 2016 at 15:30
Hi Scott,
Any chance of a post on the likely consequences of GBP devaluation? Ejection from the ERM caused a boom. I realise the UK wasn’t deliberately overvalued this time, but are there parallels?
26. June 2016 at 15:39
As for Trump himself, he’s pretty consistently been saying that he is wishy washy and will change positions on anything, at any time. He’s saying this quite explicitly, and he’s said explicitly that the positions he tries to sell are simply for posturing.
So you’re not telling us anything new, since I doubt even 30% of his supporters actually take him seriously.
On the other hand, I’m not sure who I should be more afraid of: a charlatan who will do whatever is expedient politically…or a progressive democrat whose Party platform is essentially build around the idea of importing the whole third world into this country.
Not sure I should want to be arguing here between the choice of Mensheviks vs. Bolsheviks. Can’t we say…they are both f***ing horrible disasters?
Can’t we just say that committing cultural and institutional suicide is not the…only…alternative to deporting terrorist and criminal aliens? (if the thought of that upsets you so much)
So this may be the only time I’ve ever agreed with E.Harding…but…what’s the alternative? Keep screaming “racists!”?
26. June 2016 at 15:43
RedState is having fun with this latest Trump-flop. I did the same thing: went straight to Coulter’s twitter feed to see her reaction. Crickets.
I mean… Ann Coulter? Jeff Sessions? Do you have any comment? Coulter’s been tweeting pretty much continuously since these remarks and not even a peep about them. You have nothing at all to say about the guy you’ve been supporting for the exclusive reason that he’s allegedly tough on immigration, and he just criticized Obama – President Executive Amnesty himself – for being too tough on immigration.
At what point do you decide that the ability to look at yourself in the mirror in the morning is important again?
@Lorenzo, now that Trump is essentially running as a Democrat, if he had started out that way and somehow managed to win the Democratic nomination… and say my least favorite of the other GOP candidates had won the Republican nomination (say Ted Cruz) I’d be trashing Trump all the same. Why? Because Cruz isn’t an ego-maniacal obvious know-nothing huckster and all around embarrassment to the human race.
And hey, look at this from this conspiratard: his “calculations” indicate to him that the Democrats sabotaged the GOP primary. 12 million Dems voted in the GOP primary to sabotage it by picking Trump!
http://www.redstate.com/diary/creinstein/2016/06/25/12-million-democrats-voted-republican-primaries/
Looks like he has a brilliant track record of making spot on “calculations”:
http://www.redstate.com/diary/creinstein/
26. June 2016 at 16:02
Can’t we just say that committing cultural and institutional suicide is not the…only…alternative to deporting terrorist and criminal aliens?
Sounds like Trumps position du jour is to the left of Obama (and Clinton?). So it’s hard to say who you’re referring there to regarding (heavy breathing) “cultural and institutional suicide.”
If the congress stays Republican, what exactly do you think a Democratic president will accomplish exactly? A vote for HRC is a likely a vote for more gridlock, and considering the alternatives, that sounds damn good. The only way that won’t happen is if Trump is such as colossal cluster f*ck of a candidate he actually destroys the GOP majority in congress with a down-ballot catastrophe. Good work GOP primary voters! Good work.
26. June 2016 at 16:32
Tom, The Brexit video. It actually is pretty good.
morehogwash, You said:
“Oh for Pete’s sake, you do not have any “neo-nazi” commentators. Stop slandering people because they do not agree with your leftist/globalist nonsense.
You are the one behaving like a Nazi”
What Nazi-like behavior do I engage in? Be specific.
As far as my claim about commenters, lighten up a bit.
I have commenters obsessed with how the Jews control everything. I have commenters who say Hitler was justified in taking the Sudetenland in 1938. Some seem to think whites are the master race, and other groups are inferior. Maybe neo-Nazi is a bit extreme, but only a bit—these people are way out on the fringe.
AIG, You said:
“So you’re not telling us anything new, since I doubt even 30% of his supporters actually take him seriously.”
Way more than 30%. And no, Hillary is not just as bad. I happen to despise Hillary, but only in the way that I despise lots of other ordinary politicians. We survived 8 years of her husband, and can survive 4 years of her (who I expect to be much worse than her husband.) Trump is a whole nuther level of bad.
You said:
“By now, you should have at least be getting an uneasy feeling in your stomach over the immigration and “inclusion” and “diversity” platforms of the Left. I mean, after Orlando, they blamed: Republicans, Christians, NRA, guns etc. Never dared utter the name of the real evil. I know you’re on a close enough page with someone like Bryan Caplan, and I certainly would never expect Bryan Caplan to have a reasonable thought in his mind…but from you, I’d expect at least a BIT of self-reflection at this point.”
Here and elsewhere in your comment you’ve completely misunderstood my views. Here they are:
1. I don’t blame guns or Christians or Republicans for Orlando.
2. I think the terrorism issue is totally blown out of proportion by the media.
3. Unlike the left, I don’t romanticize oppressed minorities.
What exactly do you want me to reflect on, given that I do not agree with the PC left? I’m the sensible moderate, why should I change my views?
As far as your comment about keeping out the bad guys, I’m all for that. I think you entirely missed the point of the post. For months, Trump’s been beating his chest about how he’ll stop Islamic immigration, and how Obama is soft on terrorism. Now we find out that Trump’s even softer than Obama, who has heartlessly engaged in mass deportations. You don’t find that funny? I guess you have a different sense of humor from me. I was not mocking Trump’s view here, I was mocking the fact that he spouts nonstop nonsense. This is what he should have said a year ago.
Yes, by all means, keep out the people with bad thoughts.
You said:
“By now, we’re essentially left with the choice that the Dems have brought us: open up your borders to any and all, including any and all lowlifes, and you better love it and embrace it and God Damn you racists if you complain!….and Trump.”
This is crazy talk. The Dems try to prevent terrorists from getting into the country just as forcefully as Bush did. Yes, they miss a few, but that’s inevitable. Of course, Orlando was done by an American born killer, not an immigrant like you.
Matthew, The depreciation of the pound did not reflect easy money, but rather likely economic weakness in the period ahead, and hence it is not a bullish sign for the economy. But good question.
Harding, You said:
“The most important decision a President will make next year is which SC Justice to appoint.”
You have no way of knowing that. It might be whether to go to war with Russia over an invasion of the Baltics. It might be tax reform, or the minimum wage. It could be anything.
26. June 2016 at 16:43
As far as my claim about commenters, lighten up a bit.
For that, you’d have to be amusing every once in a while. Not on the Mercatus menu.
26. June 2016 at 17:30
Tom, The Brexit video. It actually is pretty good.
That guy (Phil Mason) has a number of recent videos on the subject, most of which are pretty good IMO (and they’re all roughly the same length, but shorter than the one above):
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=33BDDAUV8vg
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=gm1xZh5fqY8
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=HUm36PYvvzw
Plus he has a couple of Google chat debates (which I skipped: too annoying)
26. June 2016 at 17:54
“For that, you’d have to be amusing every once in a while. Not on the Mercatus menu.”
…wrote the least amusing commentator here.
26. June 2016 at 17:59
“You have no way of knowing that.”
-Yes, I do. Experience has proven it.
“It might be whether to go to war with Russia over an invasion of the Baltics.”
-You are very gullible, Scott. Russia’s sphere of interests has never included the Baltics since the days of the collapse of the USSR. I have told you this many times. The fact that it allowed them to join NATO is proof enough of that. Invading the Baltics would be as stupid as invading Finland or Alaska. Russia has no interests in the Baltics. None at all. Stop listening to the filthy lies of the Economist and start considering the interests of Russia as a sovereign entity for once from a Russian perspective.
“It might be tax reform, or the minimum wage. It could be anything.”
-No, it certainly won’t be.
Tax reform is for years, and can easily be reversed by the next administration, or prevented by the existing Congress. The minimum wage is almost irrelevant, as it can be eroded by inflation without any further Congressional action in years, and Clinton is more likely to propose raising it than Trump. Supreme Court justices are for life. This is hardly debatable. Even nuclear war is less significant than Constitutional law. As the case of Germany showed, even the most deadly and destructive war has a major effect on a nation only for a decade. Misguided or perverse institutions, even in their best form, have a major effect for generations, even in the best of circumstances afterward.
If you want to see the future under Clinton, imagine a million Griggs v. Duke Powers upon the nation’s face –forever. And affirmative action mandated across the land. It’d be tyranny. Considering how the left-wing media treated Donald Tokowitz, it might well be totalitarianism. When I wrote the Strange Utopia:
https://againstjebelallawz.wordpress.com/2015/07/04/a-strange-utopia/
I was in no way joking. In fact, given what has since come to pass, I was extremely mild in my description.
“Trump is a whole nuther level of bad.”
-I have never seen you drop a shred of evidence for this.
26. June 2016 at 18:03
“This is crazy talk. The Dems try to prevent terrorists from getting into the country just as forcefully as Bush did.”
-I.e., extremely weakly. Remember what Bush said about Arabs and profiling pre-9/11!
26. June 2016 at 18:05
Thanks Scott for your response. To be clear, I wasn’t attributing these positions to YOU. They are, however, the alternative to Trump.
So the self-reflection here is…on the 2 choices given in front of us. Not my or your ideal solution (which appear to be pretty similar).
Given the choice of Trump vs. the Dems…on the issue of immigration…I’m not quite sure I see Turmps as being any more “insane” or unreasonable than the Dems position.
That’s where the self-reflection comes in: you write a lot about how nutty Trump is. The other side, seems much more nutty to me, frankly.
Especially considering that Trump doesn’t believe anything he says, most of his supporters don’t believe anything he says…while the Dems side is infested with die-hard progressives who want a lot more unrestricted third world immigration.
So that’s the choice.
26. June 2016 at 18:08
“This is crazy talk. The Dems try to prevent terrorists from getting into the country just as forcefully as Bush did”
Yeah I’m not so sure about that one either, given what we saw in Orlando. Again, I wasn’t attributing that stance to YOU. But that is the Dem alternative: blame Christians and Republicans for an act of terrorism carried out by an ISIS sympathizer who was already on a terrorist watch list.
Given that…I’m not sure Trump sounds anything remotely “crazy” on immigration.
“Sounds like Trumps position du jour is to the left of Obama (and Clinton?). So it’s hard to say who you’re referring there to regarding (heavy breathing) “cultural and institutional suicide.””
It doesn’t sound like it at all. He’s at least saying that criminal and terrorist supporters, should be deported. That’s not to the “left” of the Dems. The Dem position is to completely ignore and deflect the issue to attack “Republicans and Christians”.
As for your heavy breathing…not much to say if you can’t figure out why cultural institutions matter. This being an economic blog, you might want to read up on that.
26. June 2016 at 18:16
“If the congress stays Republican, what exactly do you think a Democratic president will accomplish exactly? A vote for HRC is a likely a vote for more gridlock, and considering the alternatives, that sounds damn good. The only way that won’t happen is if Trump is such as colossal cluster f*ck of a candidate he actually destroys the GOP majority in congress with a down-ballot catastrophe. Good work GOP primary voters! Good work.”
He will certainly destroy the GOP majority on congress. Trump is a cluster f**k for sure, and the death of the GOP.
Which is why I would be more worried about a HRC presidency, since she is in fact likely to have unrestricted power.
And what worries me even more is that the progressive Left has gone full retard on immigration and all cultural issues. Now they just scream bloody racism at everyone. Look at Brexit as en example of their complete meltdown.
Frankly, these are the not the people I want to give unrestricted power to. Trump, isn’t even likely to be able to muster half of GOP congressmen to vote his way, nevermind the rest of Congress. So he would have much harder time getting anything “done”, as opposed to a full Dem Congress-Presidency-Judicial branch.
It’s not the Trumpkins that scare me. It’s the level of insanity of the SJW…given that out of the two, only they are likely to get unrestricted government power by next year.
Scott is, mistakenly in my opinion, comparing her to her husband in 1992-2000. That was a life-time ago. Given the way the progressive Left has matured into a…frankly…fascist caricature, we’re not going to see anything comparable to the 1990s.
Feel free to take a heavy breath again, and roll your eyes. Personally, I don’t particularly find it comical that an entire political party in the US calls people racists because they point out that a radical Islamic terrorist is responsible for Orlando, and not “evil white Christians”. I’m strange that way.
26. June 2016 at 18:27
The Dem position is to completely ignore and deflect the issue to attack “Republicans and Christians”.
OK, enlighten me. Which Democratic candidates or elected Democrats are you referring to there? I’m not saying there haven’t been any, but convince me (through the preponderance of evidence) that this is “The Dem position” as you put it. Did Hillary say that? Did Obama? Harry Reid? Nancy Pelosi? Which ones?
Looked to me like the “Dem position” (as demonstrated with the sit in last week) was to (perhaps stupidly) try to keep “guns out of the hands of terrorists” with the “No fly, no buy” idea. Again, I’m not necessarily a fan of that particular tactic, but how exactly does that blame Republicans and Christians? How many Republicans and Christians are on that No Fly list anyway?
Or are you referring to a few fringe commentators who don’t really reflect “The Dem position?”
In that case, can we say the “Christian position” is well represented by the handful of fringe Christians around the country who bemoaned the shooting only insofar as Mr. Mateen didn’t kill more homosexuals?
http://www.rawstory.com/2016/06/these-7-christian-leaders-showed-their-love-by-celebrating-the-orlando-nightclub-massacre/
26. June 2016 at 18:43
Especially considering that Trump doesn’t believe anything he says, most of his supporters don’t believe anything he says…while the Dems side is infested with die-hard progressives who want a lot more unrestricted third world immigration.
Where’s the evidence that the Dem side wants “a lot more unrestricted third world immigration?”
What’s the net third world immigration been over the last 7.5 years of Democratic control of the WH?
Some of us current Dem voters used to be swing voters or even moderate Republicans, who’ve felt pushed more solidly into the Dem camp by a rightward shift in the GOP over the past 7 years, or more catastrophically by the nomination of Donald Trump. In my case, I voted H.W., Dole, and W. (1st term). Iraq pushed me out, but I thought once the fruitless-war-loving wing of the GOP (exemplified by Bill “cakewalk” Kristol) had been humiliated I might return. Unfortunately it only got worse. And I’m not the only one: my dad is 99 years old, has never voted Dem in his life, and feels like he just can’t support Trump. WTF is the party doing?? They need to crash and burn and regain their sanity IMO. But I’m not holding my breath. I’m not worried by a few extreme-lefty anti-free-speech, “safe space,” “trigger warning,” college campus ivory tower freaks so much as I am what the other side has become. Both are a cancer, in my view, but I don’t see as big a risk from the cancer on the left (yet). I guess we all have to make a judgement, and that’s mine.
26. June 2016 at 18:51
… and BTW, the Dems did their part (in my view and with my minuscule amount of help), of shutting down their extremist wing, by pretty firmly rejecting Sanders. Would I have preferred Sanders to Trump though? Absolutely… I would have preferred ANYBODY to Trump, even my 2nd and 3rd least favorites on the GOP side: Cruz and Carson. Well maybe not Carson: he’s an even bigger know-nothing than Trump… but at least he seems more mentally …uh… even, I guess would be the word. Less likely to use the power of the office to go on a vindictive witch hunt against his personal enemies. So, yes, I guess even Carson.
26. June 2016 at 18:59
Gallup says that as of last August 65% of ALL Americans preferred a “path to citizenship” for illegal immigrants. NOT just Democrats or “die-hard progressives.”
http://www.gallup.com/poll/184577/favor-path-citizenship-illegal-immigrants.aspx
26. June 2016 at 19:12
Gallup says that as of last August 65% of ALL Americans preferred a “path to citizenship” for illegal immigrants. NOT just Democrats or “die-hard progressives.”
It helps if you ask vague questions with loopholes you can drive a truck through. Just what does ‘meeting requirements’ mean to the respondent? What will it mean when our hopeless immigration enforcement cum court system gets done with it?
26. June 2016 at 19:13
Where’s the evidence that the Dem side wants “a lot more unrestricted third world immigration?”
I dunno, maybe Chuck Schumer’s amnesty legislation or BO’s political signaling to generate Central American flash mobs.
26. June 2016 at 19:16
…wrote the least amusing commentator here.
You overestimate yourself.
26. June 2016 at 19:36
“You overestimate yourself.”
Ok, that was a wee bit amusing, I’ll grant you. And maybe it’s true, however, it’s still pretty ironic (IMO) that you, of all people, have complained more than once now about other people’s inability to amuse. This is pretty damn amusing in my view:
Perhaps he’ll have the INS develop a new form for immigrants to fill out. Check one of the three boxes:
1. Terrorist _____
2. Person with bad thoughts _______
3. Good Muslim _______
26. June 2016 at 19:46
@E. Harding, Chris Christie would put you in the #NeverTrump camp?!? What is so terrible about Christie.
AIG, I _love_ your comments. I actually agree with many of Sumner’s criticisms of Trump, but people like you are just so much more reasonable than Sumner. I’m happy I voted for Cruz, but against Hillary, I’d easily pick a flip-flopping idiot over Hillary.
26. June 2016 at 19:48
Interesting post by Dajeeps (google by that name). She points out that Don Trump may have a better feel for monetary policy than Hillary, who promises to be an Obama-retread.
Dajeeps:
“In other news, Hillary has been out on the campaign trail recently taking jabs at Donald Trump. I am, for the most part, disappointed in the lineup of candidates this year, leaving me rather indifferent about what she has to say about him. The one thing she said that somewhat stirred me up, however, was her criticism of Trump’s plan B to handle economic disaster, making deals on the debt and printing money. Her statement was to the effect that printing money and low interest rates are what got us into the housing mess, and doing more of it will just make things that much worse (in the video here, about half way through). She added that we always pay our debt to maintain the full faith and credit of the US.”
There you have it. It was low interest rates that savaged the USA, or so says Hillary.
There are many reasons to not vote for Trump, or Hillary for that matter.
On monetary policy, the tip of the hat, so far, goes to Trump.
But then, I am a fan of Congressman Ron Paul, who has made youtubes on the stupidity of US foreign policy and the King Kong-sized boondoggle named the F-35.
But Paul…is a gold nut.
Ain’t no winning for this voter.
26. June 2016 at 20:09
Scott,
I promise I’m not trolling, I’m being dead serious. After all your huffing and puffing, warning that Trump is Hitler, saying that the GOP establishment should pledge to vote for Hillary in a last-ditch effort to spare us from this monster…
…you are now summing up by saying he’s a total dice roll, and so we have to choose either between the known Hillary Clinton or randomness?
Have I unfairly summarized your Trump posts on this blog, to date?
Do you see why the above would be a complete non sequitur? I know tons of people who explain why they’re voting for Trump *exactly the way you’ve described things at the end of your post*. There are a lot of people who would rather go with a complete wild card, than have 8 years of the candidate favored by the military-industrial complex.
Again, I’m not trolling, I’m being dead serious. If you’re admitting we have no idea what Trump will do in office, then why were you telling us he was Hitler for months and that we should all throw our support to Hillary to keep him out? A lot of people plausibly think a wild card is better than Hillary Clinton.
(Note: I am not voting in this election. Also, I do not like Trump personally, though the constant drumbeat of incoherent opposition from people who had no trouble with George W. Bush and his worldwide network of CIA prisons, is making me sympathize somewhat with Trump just out of a natural reaction.)
26. June 2016 at 20:16
BTW Scott when I wrote, “…though the constant drumbeat of incoherent opposition from people who had no trouble with George W. Bush and his worldwide network of CIA prisons, is making me sympathize somewhat with Trump…” I was talking about guys like Jonah Goldberg and George Will, not you.
26. June 2016 at 20:44
“What is so terrible about Christie.”
#1, he’s an idiot:
http://dailycaller.com/2015/10/29/chris-christie-loses-battle-against-nyt-paywall/
#2, he’s a really dangerous idiot:
http://www.nj.com/politics/index.ssf/2015/10/christie_on_syria_id_shoot_down_russian_jets_commi.html
Of the many things you can say about Obama, one thing you can’t say about him is that he’s an idiot. Even Rubio, though hardly Presidential material, didn’t sound too much like an idiot, simply like a young kid overly manipulable and manipulated by scoundrels. Christie? Now that’s an idiot. I don’t want him anywhere near the White House. I don’t want him making a single decision about personnel or foreign policy.
This guy might make a good AG. But as President, I suspect he’d be worse than Bushama.
26. June 2016 at 20:48
@Bob Murphy,
I can’t speak for Scott, but I think the general idea is that Trump has no principles whatsoever, except self aggrandizement and willingness to be authoritarian, vindictive, petty and erratic. He doesn’t think he needs to learn anything, nor is he interested in doing so. That’s the general idea for me. That’s also the impression of the complaint’s I read from writers at RedState.com and TheResurgent.com (Erick Erickson’s site) and from Jennifer Rubin’s “Right Turn” column (my three favorite right wing sites these days), or pretty much anyone I know personally, right, left or center.
Or think about P.J. O’Rourke’s reason for supporting Hillary: he disagrees with her on every issue, but he says at least she’s wrong “within normal parameters.” Trump is outside normal parameters most of the time, even if he happens to be right about something (accidentally).
Or think about Mussolini: he was a socialist, and then he was a fascist. Do you think it really mattered to him which ideology ultimately provided him with a pathway to authoritarian power and chest-thumping self aggrandizement, or was it more just about him?
For me, everything about Trump screams obvious huckster, narcissist and mountebank. And I mean obvious, as in he doesn’t even seem at all clever or thoughtful about it. Does it really matter what rudimentary scam he’s running? Trump University, Trump Network, Trump mortgage (or any of his other pyramid schemes), broken grand promises (Trump’s Scottish golf course), stiffing contractors on real estate projects, the birther BS of four years ago, all the lawsuits, the refusal to produce his tax returns, obvious outrageous lies and exaggerations that he reverses himself on in the very next tweet… it doesn’t really matter what comes out of his mouth at this point, because whatever it is, it’s just a badly acted show. One in which he’s willing to do anything shocking in order to keep the cameras focused on him. He reminds me of a drugged out Charley Sheen blathering about “Winning!” and “Tiger’s blood” except more thin skinned and more willing to harbor a grudge. He’s doing his best impression of a chest-thumping alpha male, and it’s not really very good. There’s no there there.
26. June 2016 at 20:56
Tom Brown, you described Trump with:
“…has no principles whatsoever, except self aggrandizement and willingness to be authoritarian, vindictive, petty and erratic. He doesn’t think he needs to learn anything, nor is he interested in doing so.”
How is that any different from Clinton?
26. June 2016 at 21:12
@Major.Freedom,
Hillary is a more or less normal politician: within one sigma of any of the following: Nixon, Wallace, Goldwater, Kennedy, Reagan, LBJ, Bush I, Bush II, Bill Clinton, Carter, Ford, Mondale, Dole, Kerry, McCain, Romney etc.
IMO, her flaws (and strengths) are more or less within normal parameters.
In my assessment, Trump is mostly outside the 3-sigma limit in all his flaws, and he has an unusual number of them as well. As for strengths, if I was an unscrupulous owner of a pump-and-dump penny stock boiler room, I’d choose Trump to run it for me over all those “normal” politicians. But that’s not the job he’s asking for.
26. June 2016 at 21:20
… put it this way, I wouldn’t expect any kind of Brexit or Brexit-lite like world stock market or currency disruption if Hillary wins in November. I do expect something like that if Trump wins. A Trump win is a win for chaos, not stability.
26. June 2016 at 21:36
“A Trump win is a win for chaos, not stability.”
-Tell that to any Syrian.
26. June 2016 at 21:38
David Dayen The Intercept
June 23 2016, 1:32 a.m.
DEFICIT HAWKS OFTEN raise the specter of hyperinflation to scare people who disagree with them. And that’s exactly what Hillary Clinton did on Tuesday.
Speaking in Columbus, Clinton criticized Donald Trump for saying last month that the U.S. can never default on its debt obligations “because you print the money.”
“We know what happened to countries that tried that in the past, like Germany in the ‘20s and Zimbabwe in the ‘90s,” Clinton said. “It drove inflation through the roof and crippled their economies.”
But printing money — otherwise known as increasing the money supply – is a routine occurrence for governments that control their own currency. The Federal Reserve has increased its balance sheet by over $3 trillion since the financial crisis, explicitly to support the economy. (The Fed does this by buying stocks and bonds with electronic cash that didn’t exist before.)…
–30–
I understand that Scott Sumner dislikes Trump, and often for sound reasons.
But this is a monetary policy blog (well, it used to be, and is advertised as such).
It does appear that Trump has a better monetary policy outlook than Hillary. You may decide to vote against Trump for others reason and that is fine. But on monetary policy Trump is better. Well, as of now.
And I have to echo some of Bob Murphy’s sentiments above. Egads, the US military-national security-foreign policy monster must be derailed. And Hillary loves it!
Eight more years in Afghanistan is not enough to show we care! We will spend $10 trillion under Hillary’s two terms for “national security.”
Maybe Trump will cut that in half, the way Cato Institute says we should. Probably not.
Worth tumbling the dice?
26. June 2016 at 21:59
Bob Murphy is dead on.
I’ve been saying the exact same thing. Specifically, if Trump is a random dice roll, then why are pro-immigration people so horrified by Trump?
Secondly, Sumner said “My biggest fear has not been Trump himself, but rather that Trump will take over the GOP and turn it into a neoreactionary party.”. Here, Trump isn’t a random dice roll, he represents a completely consistent ideology. Make up your mind.
Trump does play both sides of many issues. He is very malleable in that respect. No one can prove what Trump will or won’t do, but I would be eager to place bets on it. I bet he will pick at least one supreme court judge from his list. I bet he will be more free market on health care (despite some comments to the contrary), he won’t do a national minimum wage, he won’t grant blanket amnesty as Hillary is promising, he will built a wall with Mexico and have them pay for it, and he will be less interventionist than Hillary.
Jimmy Carter said he prefers Trump to Cruz precisely because Trump is a highly malleable wild card while Cruz is a consistent far right idealist. That is completely rational. It’s equally reasonable to prefer a highly malleable wild card to a consistent far left Hillary.
@Tom Brown,
“I think the general idea is that Trump has no principles whatsoever, except self aggrandizement and willingness to be authoritarian, vindictive, petty and erratic. He doesn’t think he needs to learn anything, nor is he interested in doing so.”
I don’t understand this mindset. I’d rather vote for a obnoxious person I hate who would enact changes I like rather than the reverse. I don’t hate Trump’s personality, but even if I did, I’d be more concerned with his actions.
26. June 2016 at 22:16
It’s uncanny just how alike are Trump and our own Boris Johnson.
http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-politics-36637037
26. June 2016 at 22:35
AIG,
You write:
He [Trump] will certainly destroy the GOP majority on congress. Trump is a cluster f**k for sure, and the death of the GOP.
You seriously think that the GOP could lose the congress in November? Here’s a piece on 538 concerning that:
http://fivethirtyeight.com/features/the-gops-house-majority-is-safe-right/
I guess overall you’re just way more worried about crazy lefty excesses than crazy righty excesses and I’m just the opposite. Personally I sense a small but growing self-policing tendency on the left in response to obvious lefty excesses, mostly on the freedom of speech front. “Social libertarianism” is a term I see more and more in response to lefty excesses. My sense is that more and more people who are centrists or just left of center are getting fed up with the SJWs, radical feminists, “cultural sensitivity” and radical Islam apologists, and fringe gender-identity sensitivity crowds. I think the #NeverTrump movement is evidence that some on the right are fed up with the alt-right, although that’s not all I think they should be fed up with (I think they should ditch the conservative purity police and a few other things as well). Both sides have problems with conspiracy theorists and an anti-science sentiment (though I’m inclined to think it’s a bigger problem on the right than the left).
26. June 2016 at 23:06
Scott, I enjoyed seeing this clever and astute article. Harding, just because Trump has said he would be friends with Russia doesn’t mean he would. He has no position on anything that you can count on. He could secretly hate Russia.
Trump is a self serving player. He cannot be trusted. http://sputniknews.com/columnists/20160510/1039369585/trump-u-turn-foreign-policy.html
And Trump’s wife has to lock her jewelry up or he will steal it. While I am kidding about that, I think, do you people really want a real estate wheeler dealer as president? You must not know much about real estate sharks.
26. June 2016 at 23:08
Tom Brown wrote:
Hillary is a more or less normal politician: within one sigma of any of the following: Nixon, Wallace, Goldwater, Kennedy, Reagan, LBJ, Bush I, Bush II, Bill Clinton, Carter, Ford, Mondale, Dole, Kerry, McCain, Romney etc.
Tom, exactly right. Don’t you understand that this is *exactly why so many people support Trump*?
The list of people you put up there, is arguably responsible for overthrowing plenty of governments and many many thousands of dead civilians, plus throw in $10 trillion in Treasury debt for kicks.
But oh my gosh, you pointed out that Trump ripped off some people in his real estate program? Is this for real?
Do you think this former UN official really died from a barbell accident? Plenty of people think Clinton had him killed, and can you blame them for thinking that?
Trump is a jerk and a boor and a liar. The list of people above are mass murderers. Maybe you’re saying Trump would be a worse mass murderer, but Scott is saying he has no idea; it’s a dice roll. (Or at least, he’s saying that now. In previous posts he was nodding and winking that Trump was Hitler.)
The reason you are probably recoiling from my “mass murderer” label is that, “C’mon Bob, all presidents act this way. We don’t call it murder, we call it foreign policy.” And that’s the point. The people who support Trump hate this system (they also care about immigration etc. way more than I do), and think it is a supreme virtue of Trump that he’s “so not like these other candidates.”
26. June 2016 at 23:13
@E. Harding,
“A Trump win is a win for chaos, not stability.”
-Tell that to any Syrian.
We have no idea what Trump would do. If he were in danger of getting his ego bruised somehow, all bets are off. Same goes for having his ego stroked. Putin and Kim Jung Un seem to have his number on that latter score already. What a cheap date! And he told us that nuclear weapons, war crimes, and torture are definitely on the table anywhere in the world, for example.
@Massimo,
Jimmy Carter said he prefers Trump to Cruz precisely because Trump is a highly malleable wild card while Cruz is a consistent far right idealist.
But you’ve got to factor in mental stability there. Being a wild card combined with signs that your ego isn’t the most important thing in all of creation is one thing, and then there’s Trump. A schizophrenic homeless man standing on the corner yelling and shaking his grimy fist at imaginary voices would probably also be “highly malleable” but that doesn’t mean I’d want him to have his hands on our nuclear codes. Although for different reasons, in both cases (Trump and homeless man) I’d prefer Cruz. Better Ted than Dead!
I’d rather vote for a obnoxious person I hate who would enact changes I like rather than the reverse. I don’t hate Trump’s personality, but even if I did, I’d be more concerned with his actions.
I agree with you there. For example, I’d rather have a successful physician with a crappy attitude work on me rather than one who’s slightly less successful but has a much better bedside manner.
But we as voters are asked to judge what the candidates actions would be based on what we see of them in their public life. With Hillary I see a flawed but reasonably stable personality (who’s definitely not very exciting) and track record which I’d estimate means a flawed but stable presidency (with only moderate amounts of corruption). Pretty much the same as for many of the other candidates we’ve had for president throughout recent history. With Trump I see a mediocre huckster, but full of himself, and not even mentally capable enough to remember what outrageous lies he told just 10 minutes ago. He claims he’s worth 10 billion, but I wouldn’t be surprised in the least to discover that’s just another outrageous lie, and he’s really worth only a tiny fraction of that. That would be par for the course. I see somebody who wouldn’t think twice and would have zero embarrassment about running a scam business. If I did hire him to run my pump-and-dump penny stock boiler room, I still wouldn’t trust him, and I’d need somebody else in there I did trust to watch him like a hawk (who I was confident wouldn’t fall for his shtick) to make sure he didn’t rob me blind. I think he’d be great for talking people out of their money though… to waste on whatever scam BS crappola I was peddling. Scan BS crappola that his victims are GUARANTEED to be extremely disappointed with.
I guess we all just have to make our own judgements and that’s my estimation of the man, and the likely actions he’d undertake. A huckster and BS artist with a dangerously fragile ego and some raw talent in terms of projecting a confident alpha male image to a certain subset of the population willing to fall for it, but that’s about it. And he seems perfectly content to let that be the sum total of his effort in any endeavor. I see no interest in him in actually learning anything beyond that.
26. June 2016 at 23:34
Benjamin Cole,
I am afraid I find your proposition that “Trump is better on monetary policy than Clinton” highly dubious. The main point to keep in mind with Trump is that it is IMPOSSIBLE to know what he thinks – I agree with the image of the dice in Scott’s post. His babblings (especially about something esoteric like monetary policy) contain zero information; it is meaningless to parse them.
One should not expect that Clinton understands monetary policy either, by the way. But at least one expect that she will be more of the same. Obama could have done a lot worse than choosing Yellen, for instance.
26. June 2016 at 23:37
… and I see no evidence that he “picks the best people” to act as his surrogates, as he’s always telling us he does. Just look at what an absolute cluster f*ck his campaign is right now, in terms of being competitive for a general election.
The fact that he won the GOP primary is astounding, but that’s an entirely different set of (angry) voters, who apparently are starved senseless for a demonstration of raw anti-establishment Alpha, which Trump delivered in spades.
As an outsider, watching Trump in action during the GOP primary was almost precisely like watching “Reverend” Peter Popoff work a faith healing revival tent full of desperate-to-believe willing victims.
Now there’s probably a con artist out there perfectly attuned to taking me for all I’m worth, but Peter Popoff is not it. (Somebody might claim it’s Hillary I suppose). It makes me physically ill to watch that obvious scam artist (Popoff) in action, and I have the same reaction to Trump. I don’t see much of a difference between the two.
27. June 2016 at 00:08
“As an outsider, watching Trump in action during the GOP primary was almost precisely like watching “Reverend” Peter Popoff work a faith healing revival tent full of desperate-to-believe willing victims.”
… and Hillary is more like watching an adequate Methodist Navy chaplain give a perfunctory ho-hum sermon, pass the mic off to the so-so choir on cue, and generally bore the crap out of her Sunday flock in the “All Faith Chapel” before they feel they’ve done their duty and can get home ASAP to catch the rest of the game. Hallelujah!!
Excitement in politics is highly overrated.
27. June 2016 at 00:23
“I don’t see much of a difference between the two.”
…except that I’d be more inclined to vote for Popoff than Trump. From what little I’ve seen from him, Popoff seems less likely to fall for his own BS, eff up and spill the beans to the advantage of hostile foreign powers, or generally get carried away feeding and protecting his own ego. Sure, he’d do all in his power to enrich himself at our expense, but I wouldn’t feel as in danger of chaos getting out of hand as I would with Trump.
27. June 2016 at 03:03
“But oh my gosh, you pointed out that Trump ripped off some people in his real estate program? Is this for real?”
How many people have you ripped off, Bob Murphy? Is 40,000 Americans being ripped of to the tune of thousands each small potatoes to you?
Certainly no one wants to go into business with you.
As Trump has no public service experience at all, we have to judge him by his private business record. That’s he’s charlatan and a crook is not exactly encouraging.
Maybe that’s why if ‘so many support Trump’ so many more don’t support him and never will. Polls show that 70 percent think he’s not qualified to be President.
As for this idea ‘Gee, at least he’s not a politician’ what other job would this be a selling point for?
‘Good afternoon, ladies and gentlemen. I am your pilot today. I have no experience whatsoever as a pilot.’
‘But isn’t that refreshing? I didn’t got to any fancy pilot school. I don’t think you learn anything there. Enjoy your trip.’
Even Nixon releases his tax returns. What is Trump hiding?
When dealing with world markets and international relations the last thing you want to do is roll the dice.
And I actually think you should hold him to what he says. Clearly David Duke and friends take him at his word.
As for killing people, you forgot that time Hillary killed Vince Foster.
As long as we’re getting into Right wing conspiracies you can’t leave out the suicide that was not really a suicide.
As for Hitler analogies they are unmistakeable. Trump is about the only person I’ve ever heard of who actually admires the Tinanmen Square Massacre.
He admires Kim Jong Un, he admires Putin, and he clearly holds Hitler in high esteem.
He keeps a copy of his speeches by his bedside. You know that right? Do you know that?
http://www.businessinsider.com/donald-trumps-ex-wife-once-said-he-kept-a-book-of-hitlers-speeches-by-his-bed-2015-8
While some say you can’t compare anyone to Hitler, it should be noted that Hitler was democratically elected, he wasn’t hatched somewhere.
I’m sure in 1932, we had the Bob Murphys of the time saying at least Hitler will be better than the Weimar Republic.
He’s going to get rid of the Jews and he will not do any more bad trade deals.
27. June 2016 at 03:06
Overall, it’s interesting how all these alleged libertarians are always defending a wanna be strong man like Trump.
They always preface it the same way ‘I don’t support Trump, but’
Classic shy Tory effect.
27. June 2016 at 03:11
As for this Bob Murphy line ‘Gee he’s not Hitler. It’s just flipping a coin. He might be Hitler, but then again, he might not. So give him a shot.’
What sort of a guide is that for voting? If Trump basically is not going to tell voters what he will do as President why have elections at all?
The worse thing in markets and foreign relations is Trump’s ‘Uncertainty Doctrine.’
http://nymag.com/daily/intelligencer/2016/01/trump-voters-want-unpredictability.html
27. June 2016 at 03:43
File this under the If it wasn’t so pathetic you’d have to laugh category.
Boris Johnson just declared that ‘project fear is over’ and everyone’s fine. No problems with anyone’s pensions, retirement savings, etc.
He obviously hasn’t looked at anyone’s pensions, retirement savings, etc.
Meanwhile markets around the world are again in freefall. They just had to suspend RBS and Barclays shares
But no one has been hurt. Not a single pension has been hurt due to Brexit. Not a single one.
Turns out he has more in common with Trump than just the hairstyles and the hatred of Muslims.
http://www.independent.co.uk/news/uk/politics/brexit-boris-johnson-banks-economy-rbs-barclays-consequences-project-fear-latest-news-a7105311.html
27. June 2016 at 04:08
Scott, some of us have been mentioning all along that Trump starts out with them initial outrageous position, from which he negotiates towards a more reasonable one. Why did it take you so long to figure this out?
Tom Brown: Trump has been in the public by four for decades, and that whole time, he says outrageous things, while behaving fairly normally. At 70, he suddenly going to start behaving like Hitler?!
PJ O’Rourke is voting for Hillary because he likes getting invited inside or cocktail parties. Period.
27. June 2016 at 04:08
Sorry, Siri mangled my comment above a little bit
27. June 2016 at 04:15
Interesting. All the supposed Austrian libertarian types are in love with Trump.
Tells me that most of us are right about the low esteem we hold Austrian libertarian types in.
He behaves normally alright. He’s audited every year, has been subject to 3500 lawsuits, scammed at least 40,000 Americans at Trump U and makes up stories about cheering Muslims.
How utterly normal?
You love the way people make the case for Trump. “But Hillary, but Hillary, but Hillary.’
In 1932 it was ‘But the Weimar Republic…’
27. June 2016 at 04:21
“Trump has been in the public by four for decades, and that whole time, he says outrageous things, while behaving fairly normally. At 70, he suddenly going to start behaving like Hitler?!”
Interesting question. How does Gene Callahan define acting like Hitler for someone in private life?
It would seem one way would be to say a lot of bigoted things. Or maybe keeping a book of HIlter’s speeches in a cabinet by his bed.
Anyway, there’s something that he does that impresses the Neo Nazis and KKKers that love him.
27. June 2016 at 04:43
I have said this before, and I am with Bob Murphy on this:
Clinton is a sure bad thing, whereas the expectations on Trump are so low that he will surprise on the up side with very high probability.
Most of his very controversial proposals will have a hard time in Congress and Courts anyway, whereas Clinton’s bad economic ideas will have a chance to pass, which is a shameful thing
27. June 2016 at 04:49
‘Or think about Mussolini: he was a socialist, and then he was a fascist.’
Those are the same isms.
27. June 2016 at 04:51
‘How does Gene Callahan define acting like Hitler for someone in private life?’
Doing a beer hall putsch? Hiring thugs to dress up in brown shirts and beat up Jews on the streets?
27. June 2016 at 05:12
@Tom Brown,
“With Trump I see a mediocre huckster, but full of himself, and not even mentally capable enough to remember what outrageous lies he told just 10 minutes ago.”
Trump won the Republican primary with almost zero funding, against very well funded establishment candidates. That is an unheard of upset. Dismissing him a run of the mill simpleton at this point doesn’t fly. You are outraged that he doesn’t remember or acknowledge his lies… he’s obviously not playing by your rules.
Again, I’d prefer a different system for determining policy and leaders. But vs Hillary, I definitely prefer Trump
27. June 2016 at 05:34
So he’s just like all the other Republican and Democrat politicians. They tell one set of lies to win the primaries and then another contradictory set of lies to win the general.
I find it all amusing. Why don’t the voters demand the truth? I got no idea.
27. June 2016 at 05:38
Of course if the median voter got his way we might end up like Venezuela! Maybe it is good that our politicians lie so much.
27. June 2016 at 06:18
Harding, You are discrediting yourself by ignoring the fact that Trump just walked away from his tough immigration stance. Don’t you believe in ANYTHING?
AIG, You said:
“while the Dems side is infested with die-hard progressives who want a lot more unrestricted third world immigration.”
No they don’t. You are really out of touch with the left. Sanders is especially hostile to increased immigration, and he dominates the left today.
But I certainly would like to see lots more immigration, I’ve suggested raising it to about 3 million a year, from the current level of about 1 million. Of course most immigrants will come from third world countries like India and China, why would people from rich countries want to me here in large numbers?
You said:
“Yeah I’m not so sure about that one either, given what we saw in Orlando.”
Given that Orlando was done by an American killer, not an immigrant? Seriously, what is your point? How could Obama have prevented Orlando? I don’t get it.
You said:
“As for your heavy breathing…not much to say if you can’t figure out why cultural institutions matter. This being an economic blog, you might want to read up on that.”
I’ve probably been reading about the importance of cultural institutions longer than you’ve been alive. I’ve even read about how people in the 1800s thought that the immigration of “inferior” Irish, Italians and Jews would destroy our wonderful WASP society.
And you are simply wrong about the Dems, they are just as much in favor of deporting terrorists than Trump. Trump’s actually correct about Obama’s mass deportations. It’s true.
You said:
“Personally, I don’t particularly find it comical that an entire political party in the US calls people racists”
I don’t find it comical that the GOP nominates someone that even most GOP leaders acknowledge is racist.
Bob, You said:
“I promise I’m not trolling, I’m being dead serious. After all your huffing and puffing, warning that Trump is Hitler, saying that the GOP establishment should pledge to vote for Hillary in a last-ditch effort to spare us from this monster…
…you are now summing up by saying he’s a total dice roll, and so we have to choose either between the known Hillary Clinton or randomness?
Have I unfairly summarized your Trump posts on this blog, to date?”
Yup, totally unfairly. I’ve answered this silly argument over and over again. The problem is not what Trump really believes, which no one knows. It’s that he’s unqualified to be President and he’s turning the GOP in France’s National Front, a right wing populist movement. I.e. it’s what he represents. For every KKKer who joins the GOP because of Trump, a George Will will exit.
I don’t know why Trump supporters are reassured to find out that the man they want to have his finger on the nuclear trigger is a completely random madman who is utterly unpredictable. And who also has a temper problem and a revenge problem. You are reassured by that?
You said:
“then why were you telling us he was Hitler for months”
I’ve never told you he’s Hitler. He’s nothing like Hitler.
And it’s irresponsible for you not to vote in this election, with so much at stake. Why wouldn’t you at least vote for Johnson as the lesser of evils? If you can’t see why Trump is a disaster then I question your judgment.
Tom, You said:
“Gallup says that as of last August 65% of ALL Americans preferred a “path to citizenship” for illegal immigrants.”
Trump does too.
You said:
“Or think about P.J. O’Rourke’s reason for supporting Hillary: he disagrees with her on every issue, but he says at least she’s wrong “within normal parameters.” Trump is outside normal parameters most of the time, even if he happens to be right about something (accidentally).”
As usual, PJ is right.
Ben, You said:
“Interesting post by Dajeeps (google by that name). She points out that Don Trump may have a better feel for monetary policy than Hillary, who promises to be an Obama-retread.”
Thanks for some comic relief. A 2 year old baby doesn’t have sound opinions on monetary policy, because it doesn’t know what monetary policy is. Neither does Trump. Trump thinks that monetary policy is interest rates. I kid you not, check out his comments on the Fed.
Gene, You said:
“Scott, some of us have been mentioning all along that Trump starts out with them initial outrageous position, from which he negotiates towards a more reasonable one. Why did it take you so long to figure this out?”
Actually, I have been saying this from the beginning—why don’t you know that?
You said:
PJ O’Rourke is voting for Hillary because he likes getting invited inside or cocktail parties. Period.”
That’s such a weak argument, it tends to discredit everything else you say. Trump people think they are the only honest people, everyone else is corrupt. I think the inability to put oneself into the mind of others helps to explain their opposition to immigration.
27. June 2016 at 06:40
Scott
FWIW, Trump is not evil, “anti-women”,or even a political narcissist. I think he really wants to be a good president in the commonly accepted meaning of that phrase. But his biggest failing is he is an amateur who does not know even the baseline of some of the most important issues in this country, and therefore he does not know where discussions should begin on highlighting differences on common issues. If you want to be really mean, he is a political ignoramus. But I choose to have a more empathetic take.
A classic example was his comment on abortion. He is personally against abortion, but somehow the logic of his stance was pushed to the extreme. In fact, he was put into a corner (because he is an amateur) to show that his positions imply women who abort should be jailed. The irony, of course, is if you believe a pre-born child has the same rights as a born child this is a logical conclusion.
But we are not a Christian caliphate. It took him a few days to unwind that position. This is typical Trump. I do not view his many changes as saying what people want to here but rather incrementally waking up to the reality of the difference between political morality and personal morality—in this case abortion (and in your examples immigration.)
Hillary, on the other hand, is a self proclaimed expert on everything, but a believer in 60″s left wing politics mixed with an element of Nixonian foreign politics (referring to his Vietnam strategy). I believe she is more dishonest than Trump but far more knowledgeable, clever and devious in the way of the world.
Trump got great kudos because he was able to read a teleprompter speech. As absurd as that sounds, it is an improvement. I hope he can continue to improve and land on a
consistent set themes regarding regulation,trade, taxes, military strength, Hillary revelations, and immigration.
Your style of mockery of Trump reminds me of me when i really do not have a clear idea on a topic but seek to defend it—I panic and just throw out drivel. I know you think you have a clear idea, but you are sloppy in your analysis due to your pseudo certainty—it goes against everything you have been taught to believe—you cannot imagine the “Trump” I describe (although that does not make me right)
I admit I may be wrong on Trump and that he is the type of person you believe he is. But the Republican 17 were truly atrocious. They could not beat him because they are drones with no ability to react to the not previously seen. Trump had attitude if not knowledge. They were “my turn politicians”.
The Convention and debates will reveal much about both candidates. Trump is an option while Hillary is a futures contract. If Trump is elected and puts forth bizarre positions his positions will expire unexercised, If he consolidates his views in a coherent whole, they can be exercised in the money. Hillary, on the other hand is a known entity who, as you do , I despise. We know the path she is likely to take.
I wish we did not have a Trump as a candidate, but rather a fully formed charismatic philosophical Reaganite style one. But who was that guy? I even like smart technocrats. Too bad Mitch Daniels’ personal life made him afraid to run.
I hope GOP keeps at least the House. Speaking of which, when 50% of your party likes the candidate, they should try to be helpful, rather than threatening to blow him out at the convention. They need to be all in or they will get caught in the huge blowback.
27. June 2016 at 07:00
Mike, You said:
“FWIW, Trump is not evil, “anti-women”,or even a political narcissist. I think he really wants to be a good president in the commonly accepted meaning of that phrase. But his biggest failing is he is an amateur who does not know even the baseline of some of the most important issues in this country, and therefore he does not know where discussions should begin on highlighting differences on common issues. If you want to be really mean, he is a political ignoramus. But I choose to have a more empathetic take.
A classic example was his comment on abortion. He is personally against abortion, but somehow the logic of his stance was pushed to the extreme.”
My reply:
He is evil, anti-women and (obviously) a political narcissist.
I don’t think he wants to be a good president, he wants to be a famous president.
Yes, he’s ignorant, which by itself disqualifies him. Would you want a plumber doing brain surgery?
He is almost certainly not against abortion. He says that because GOP candidates must, but when he could speak his mind freely he even favored partial birth abortion. Those are his true beliefs.
Sorry, but I think your views are naive. Trump is exactly what evil demagogues look and sound like. He’s playing the part perfectly. Think back to your middle school years when your history teacher explained to you about demagogues. How they manipulated people by appealing to their worst fears, and their bigotry against people who are different. He’s even read books on how to be a demagogue. Just as your history teacher predicted, the public can be fooled by demagogues—Trump’s a perfect example.
I’m not fooled, nor is George Will. Bit lots of people are fooled. He’s a demagogue right out of central casting.
27. June 2016 at 07:10
Trump thinks that monetary policy is interest rates.
That’s actually a pretty good answer for a politician. Ask any politician what monetary policy is. What kind of answers do you expect?!
completely random madman
…
From the beginning, I’ve said that Trump’s words mean nothing
…
Trump starts out with an initial outrageous position, from which he negotiates towards a more reasonable one. Actually, I have been saying this from the beginning.
…
I’ve never told you he’s Hitler. He’s nothing like Hitler.
…
He’s turning the GOP in France’s National Front, a right wing populist movement. I.e. it’s what he represents.
…
on immigration Trump will have an even bigger heart than Obama.
Speaking of baby babble: It’s pretty hard to follow you when you talk about Trump. My diagnosis: Trump Derangement Syndrome. He got you Scott, he really got you.
I really admire your calmness regarding other topics but when you write about Trump you still sound like the end of the world is near. My advice: Keep calm and relax.
27. June 2016 at 07:15
He will certainly destroy the GOP majority on congress. Trump is a cluster f**k for sure, and the death of the GOP.
The Rothenberg Report has rated all congressional contests. As of now, there are 219 safe Republican seats. The ratings on all competitive contests suggest a net loss of 7 seats for the Republican caucus. Currently, 14 of 24 Republican Senate seats are rated safe. The ratings on the competitive contests suggest the Republican caucus will lose 2-3 seats.
27. June 2016 at 07:18
Yes, he’s ignorant, which by itself disqualifies him. Would you want a plumber doing brain surgery?
You’ve put up with BO, whose executive experience consisted of running the Chicago Annenberg Challenge into the ground and who never met any professional milestones in any endeavour he followed.
27. June 2016 at 07:20
Sorry, but I think your views are naive. Trump is exactly what evil demagogues look and sound like. He’s playing the part perfectly. Think back to your middle school years when your history teacher explained to you about demagogues.
Not in his lesson plans. He was a history teacher, not a polemicist. We got to hear about British military tactics and German industrial production.
27. June 2016 at 07:22
I’m not fooled, nor is George Will. Bit lots of people are fooled.
Will is not reflecting much on why the conservative commentariat have so little influence. As for you, you’ve been beclowning yourself for weeks.
27. June 2016 at 07:31
But the Republican 17 were truly atrocious.
The Republican 17 included the country’s most accomplished Governor (Walker), several other experienced public executives (Huckabee, Jindal, Perry, Bush, Christie, Kasich, Pataki, Gilmore), a business executive of standing (Fiorina), and a lawyer-legislator described as ‘off the charts brilliant’ by Alan Dershowitz, one of his former teachers. That’s adequate. The other candidates were not appropriate, but they had their accomplishments and virtues (Dr. Carson in particular, but also Sen. Santorum and Sen Paul, who know and say what they think). The most insipid candidates were Gov. Sneers Pataki and the 2d string open borders pushers (Graham, Rubio).
27. June 2016 at 07:33
He is evil, anti-women and (obviously) a political narcissist.
Actually, he’s like Frank Sinatra. All his wives speak well of him.
27. June 2016 at 07:44
Interesting question. How does Gene Callahan define acting like Hitler for someone in private life?
1. Incapacity to build a domestic life.
2. Incapacity to learn and follow a trade, or build a business, or make a career.
3. Given to political fanaticisms. (Note, for example, Hitler’s superiors refused to promote him because they thought him unstable).
4. Given to social fantasy (the whole Jew thing).
5. Given to quirky, hypochonriachal, and obsessive-compulsive behavior. The vegetarianism, the neglect of hygiene conjoined to constant medical pseudo-care (given by a gargoyle of a man named Theodore Morell), fretting over urban and architectural plans he’d puzzled over for decades while bombs were raining down on Berlin.
27. June 2016 at 07:47
“Given that Orlando was done by an American killer, not an immigrant?”
-Uh… are you really that stupid, Scott?
“It’s that he’s unqualified to be President and he’s turning the GOP in France’s National Front, a right wing populist movement.”
-The National Front is cucked.
“For every KKKer who joins the GOP because of Trump, a George Will will exit.”
-I don’t care. Screw them both.
Make America Great Again!
27. June 2016 at 07:47
to show that his positions imply women who abort should be jailed. The irony, of course, is if you believe a pre-born child has the same rights as a born child this is a logical conclusion.
But we are not a Christian caliphate.
We were not a Christian caliphate in 1962 either. Abortion was unsafe, illegal, and rare. Statutory law in New York was explicit that women who procured abortions were criminally liable (though some have contended that prosecutors concentrated their fire on purveyors). Of course, prosecuting both sides of the transaction is perfectly reasonable and something to be desired.
27. June 2016 at 07:49
“For every KKKer who joins the GOP because of Trump, a George Will will exit.”
The total population of klaverns in the United States is about 2,000, give or take the FBI informants.
The total population of syndicated columnists is less than that.
27. June 2016 at 07:51
Actually, he’s like Frank Sinatra. All his wives speak well of him.
That does not count. In liberal America you need to screw anything with a heartbeat Bill Clinton style then you count as feminist. And your weird wife gets President after you like in Kirchner Argentina.
27. June 2016 at 08:00
“Would you want a plumber doing brain surgery?”
-Better than the knowingly incompetent wife of a former brain surgeon.
“and (obviously) a political narcissist”
-No. He’s a political realist. You thought it was narcissistic for him to claim he would be the nominee. He became the nominee.
27. June 2016 at 08:06
Of course, the #NeverTrump crew are real people with virtues and vices. I’ve heard of about 40 people on that list (or have read the publications they’re associated with). Most I would not say anything against, but about 17 I would. Ross Douthat, George Will, and Wm. Kristol have something to day. But for every one of these, you’ve got a half-dozen pests, careerists, and crudniks (Daniel Foster, Christine Todd Whitman, and Matt Kibbe to name one of each).
27. June 2016 at 08:12
And your weird wife gets President after you like in Kirchner Argentina.
He was first elected to public office about 4 years before she was, but their political careers were co-incident. They held different offices. The only rough analogue in this country I can think of would be Maurine Neuberger and her husband, Richard, some 60-odd years ago).
27. June 2016 at 08:15
Bob Murphy:
Your list of mass murderers includes Carter, Ford, Mondale…Mondale?!?!
To paraphrase Inigo Montoya, I’m not so sure the term “mass murderer” means what you think it means.
27. June 2016 at 09:14
Hillary is a more or less normal politician: within one sigma of any of the following: Nixon, Wallace, Goldwater, Kennedy, Reagan, LBJ, Bush I, Bush II, Bill Clinton, Carter, Ford, Mondale, Dole, Kerry, McCain, Romney etc.
Hillary is dissimilar to all of these men bar her husband (in lack of scruple) and Nixon (in vindictiveness; and for sheer venom, Hillary outclasses Nixon, who left private citizens in peace bar Lewis Fielding). This is a nutty list in one other respect: those on it are quite dissimilar to each other. Goldwater and Reagan were conviction politicians. That’s arguable regarding Carter. The rest of these characters were (or have been) careerists who differed mainly in the degree to which issues were fungible (Nixon and Bush I, quite high; Mondale and the elder LBJ, fairly low). As human beings, Kennedy, LBJ, Wallace, and Clinton were or have been appalling. Dole, Kerry, McCain, and even Goldwater have some ‘splainin’ to do. Most of the rest have or had a history of crass behavior but are normal range, with Romney and Carter (and Nixon, for the most part) exceptions.
27. June 2016 at 10:56
“committing cultural and institutional suicide”
I’m pretty sure Trump’s idea of cultural and institutional suicide is spending a night at the Holiday Inn.
27. June 2016 at 11:03
These posts crack me up. It seem slike Art Deco and E. Harding don’t know Scott is trolling. It’ll be lots of fun to revisit these threads in December.
Also, this is an incredibly stupid sentence:
“Clinton is a sure bad thing, whereas the expectations on Trump are so low that he will surprise on the up side with very high probability.”
Is this also how NBA execs come up with their draft picks?
27. June 2016 at 11:06
There is some truth to the argument:
President Trump would be a Cuck, cuckolded both by his own ignorance, and a critical Congress, whereas,
President Hillary could easily get an Enabling Act through her adoring Congress and uncritical media.
So which is worse? The danger of Trump is what he might do with expanded executive authority (thanks, Lefties!). Hillary could be better because she will want to get re-elected in 2020. But then again, all she needs is 10 million new 3rd world voters, not centrist policy…
27. June 2016 at 11:17
Bob asked Scott:
“then why were you telling us he was Hitler for months”
Scott responded: “I’ve never told you he’s Hitler. He’s nothing like Hitler.”
Scott, I realize you often have fun with E. Harding and Ray Lopez, etc., but are you being serious here with me? Or are you just goofing around with me too, since (I guess) you conclude I secretly like Trump and thus am not worth actually having a rational conversation with?
Are you truly saying I can’t go dig up (say) 3 posts from the last 3 months where you have said that Trump is acting like Hitler, and you can’t understand why so few Republican voters see that?
Or, do you fully admit that, and you’re just playing a joke here with me because on those occasions you did it in your wink-wink “Now folks, we’re not supposed to make analogies to a certain strong man in Germany, but…” ?
27. June 2016 at 11:26
Carl wrote:
Bob Murphy:
Your list of mass murderers includes Carter, Ford, Mondale…Mondale?!?!
To paraphrase Inigo Montoya, I’m not so sure the term “mass murderer” means what you think it means.
Carl, I’m genuinely curious. To refresh our memories, here’s what I wrote:
The list of people you put up there, is arguably responsible for overthrowing plenty of governments and many many thousands of dead civilians, plus throw in $10 trillion in Treasury debt for kicks.
…
Trump is a jerk and a boor and a liar. The list of people above are mass murderers.
Now in your heart of hearts, did you really think I was trying to say that each person on that list (including Walter Mondale) had been responsible for overthrowing government and was a mass murderer,
OR
Do you think I meant that the list taken as a whole was responsible for those outcomes, and that I didn’t go out of my way to exclude Mondale because I thought everybody would know full well what point I was making?
(I realize I am probably overreacting to your comment, but you did deploy “?!?!” against me, which should only be done in self-defense.)
27. June 2016 at 11:32
Mike Sax wrote:
As for this Bob Murphy line ‘Gee he’s not Hitler. It’s just flipping a coin. He might be Hitler, but then again, he might not. So give him a shot.’
What sort of a guide is that for voting?
Mike, I’ll cut you some slack since (I think?) you are a Democrat and thus I can understand that “we’re all the same” from your perspective.
But, I actually didn’t say anything like that. It was SCOTT who said Trump is a coin flip or, more accurately, a roll of the dice. He even put a picture of dice at the end of post, to make sure you got his point.
And then, I was telling him that that is why a lot of people support Trump (I’ve heard them say it, in so many words), and asking him why he’s spent months warning us that Trump is Hitler if in fact he’s now arguing Trump is a dice roll.
I can’t control the actions of others, and you’re right that some libertarians are being a bit coy about Trump. But I mean it when I say I dislike him personally, and I think he’d been an awful president, and I’m not voting for him.
Last thing: Do you really think that UN official, who was about to testify in a plea deal involving him taking money from a Chinese billionaire, actually had a barbell accident that killed him at home? I’m not asking you to say Hillary Clinton strangled him with her bare hands, but you really think that guy died in an accident?
27. June 2016 at 11:59
Well Bob I thought you were implying Mondale was a murderer. Maybe you know something about him I don’t?
Not surprised to see you here on the Trump side. Scratch a libertarian long enough you find a conservative.
27. June 2016 at 12:06
It seem slike Art Deco and E. Harding don’t know Scott is trolling.
He’s not lobbing insults at people because he’s in a good humor. I’m surprised you haven’t noticed he’s dead serious or he’s not depending on how inane an analogy looks on second impression.
27. June 2016 at 12:10
Scratch a libertarian long enough you find a conservative.
No, you don’t, because libertarians (bar the Southern partisan variety) give no thought whatsoever to what holds society together and what common objects people have and how they might best be pursued. It’s all whinging about drug laws, the police, and OPEN BORDERS.
27. June 2016 at 13:19
Bob Murphy:
If you say that wasn’t your intent to implicate Mondale, I believe you. So, which of the people on the list were you calling mass murderers? (Note the single punctuation mark.)
27. June 2016 at 13:19
Trump is a living political Rorschach inkblot test … a person’s reaction to the “trump blot” can be indicative of underlying thought disorder…
27. June 2016 at 13:21
“Scratch a libertarian long enough you find a conservative.”
I disagree… Scratch a libertarian long enough you find a Utopian.
27. June 2016 at 13:25
Zack asks… “Anyone else starting to wonder if “E. Harding” is some sort of parody?”
I think he is clearly a parody… Im sure if he knows he is or not though.
27. June 2016 at 13:31
@ art deco… You don’t really think trump has a chance in hell do you ? You are just ( From your point of view) fighting the good fight…. right?
27. June 2016 at 13:42
“I think he is clearly a parody… Im sure if he knows he is or not though.”
-Bug off.
27. June 2016 at 13:42
Art deco claims ….”All his (trump’s) wives speak well of him.”
http://www.thedailybeast.com/articles/2015/07/27/ex-wife-donald-trump-made-feel-violated-during-sex.html
27. June 2016 at 13:42
Carl,
OK let’s start with two easy ones: LBJ and Nixon, because of the Vietnam War. Can you understand why I would say they are mass murderers responsible for many many thousands of dead people?
I can’t tell if you’re arguing with me about where to draw the line, or if you’re rejecting my claim that producing thousands of dead civilians is a strike against somebody’s moral character.
27. June 2016 at 13:44
Scratch a libertarian long enough you find a conservative.
OK, and scratch a leftist long enough and you find someone who has no problem with millions of dead people–so long as they were killed by people who had the right intentions regarding income equality.
27. June 2016 at 13:46
Last thing and I’ll go, since there is clearly nothing to be gained from further discussion.
It makes no sense to argue the following two statements:
(A) Trump is a madman who will plunge us into World War III.
(B) Trump is such a narcissist that all Putin has to do is compliment him, to get Trump to do his bidding.
I mean, unless you think Putin is really averse to giving a compliment.
27. June 2016 at 13:52
E harding… Bug off ? R U SAD ? do you have an ouchy on your’ums heart ?
Let me help…what’s bugging you, Guy ? Lets talk about it…
But here in “the median while” …this is from one of the best hip hop albums ever… ” Miseducation of Lauryn Hill”” Listen to it…it’ll make you feel better… ‘Everything Is Everything’ https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=i3_dOWYHS7I
27. June 2016 at 13:55
“You don’t really think trump has a chance in hell do you ?”
-Problem for you is, he does:
http://thefederalist.com/2014/09/04/history-is-not-on-the-democrats-side-in-2016/
27. June 2016 at 14:14
If you are against amnesty you are for expulsion …
you are for creating death and deprivation on a large scale…
you are for dumping millions of people on a nation that can’t possibly handle it…
you are for putting millions of people in camps…
You are for suspending the United States Constitution…
You are for turning America into a police state… (however temporary )
If you are against amnesty…you are necessarily a fascist if you know it or not….. or you are an incoherent someone who is asking for a “solution” but not willing to back the kinda thing (fascism ) that it would take to get to the “solution”…
I have more respect for fascists that are willing to own it, rather than fascist who pretend that they aren’t facist…the ones who fool themselves are pathetic.
27. June 2016 at 14:23
E harding says “-Problem for you is (trump ), he does (Have a chance to win ) :
They’ll Anything to sell the “news” wont they ? Trump is TOAST…toasty toasty toast… He’s done… its over… Emphatically,… trump is done. That you don’t see that trump is toxic does not reflect well on your powers of discernment… ( I guess that’s just one more thing on the list of things you’ve posted that call the powers of your reason and discernment into question )
How long will you be trump’s personal “baghdad bob” on “The money illusion” comments ?
27. June 2016 at 14:41
@ art deco… You don’t really think trump has a chance in hell do you ?
Elections not for four months. He’s always within striking distance in polls. Rothenberg has Hellary favored for 221 electoral votes, Trump for 191, with the rest competitive though leaning to Hellary at this time.
I’m not sure why you fancy Hellary has this sewn up. Third terms for an incumbent party are atypical and are generally a close shave when they do happen. One exception was 1928, but BO, unlike Calvin Coolidge, is regarded ambivalently by the electorate, as is his party. The election of 1836 is another exception, but the Republicans will be running one candidate, not four.
27. June 2016 at 14:44
Bob Murphy:
I’m arguing with you because calling leaders of our country mass murderers matters. We live in a representative democracy and our leaders represent us.
You’ve winnowed your list down to 2 “easy ones” out of 15. That seems a bit reckless about the reputations of the other 13.
What constitutes a mass muderer in your opinion? Someone who is at the head of a regime during wartime? Are there any victorious wartime leaders who were not mass murderers?
27. June 2016 at 14:48
Nope. When push comes to shove all libertarians are deep down conservatives.
Bob you’re probably right about leftists. That is why I don’t like leftists.
27. June 2016 at 14:56
“whereas the expectations on Trump are so low that he will surprise on the up side with very high probability.”
If that’s a good thing…It would be even better if someone even more repugnant and less confidence inspiring than trump won the presidency… oh boy…
Vote for me…I suck so hard I won’t disappoint you when I don’t suck quite as hard as you’d feared I would !!!
27. June 2016 at 14:59
Art deco… You obviously are not educated enough in polling and demographics.. If you were you would not be blinded by your partisan wish fulfillment needs.
Trump is done.
27. June 2016 at 15:11
“Trump is done.”
-Actually, it’s Her who’s done. Even a 3 point popular vote drop from Obama would lead Hillary to lose. And historically, the drop has been greater than this all but twice (once due to the collapse of the Federalists, once due to granting Blacks the vote).
“You obviously are not educated enough in polling and demographics”
-Look in the mirror.
27. June 2016 at 15:28
Art deco… You obviously are not educated enough in polling and demographics.. If you were you would not be blinded by your partisan wish fulfillment needs.
I’ll consult history, current survey research, and modeling (though I do not have access to databases of academic journals anymore). You place great weight on what you pull out of your ass. For obvious reasons, I do not.
27. June 2016 at 15:47
E harding… “Fuck off Cuck’ ? You are weirdly obsessed with bringing your sexual insecurities into a discussion about politics…(ICKY) no wonder you worship trump…
You should learn to think for yourself… That way you wouldn’t have to kneel before your strong daddy figure blindly swallowing any goo he sprays into your mouth …for you then you spit back on to comments sections like this one… it thrills to come here and spew all that you have greedily swallowed… does’nt you Sick fuck .
Take off that skirt, put on some big boy pants, think for yourself,….
AND …. stop being a creepy dude obsessed with men who need to submit themselves to authority figures, like you do with Trump… Do you know how gross and pathetic your are ?
27. June 2016 at 15:56
E. Harding
““A Trump win is a win for chaos, not stability.””
“-Tell that to any Syrian.”
So you are one of these morons that yell’s ‘Red Line” !!! And thinks he has a clue ?
what’s trumps plan for bring peace to syria ???
I know…he gonna be the best at syria…he’ll be the best you ever had…he’ll know all the buttons to push and right places to touch…he will drive you wild with how good he’s gonna be on Syria…he’ll have you squirming and begging him to stop… he’ll be so good at taking care of all that tension you’ve built up over syria you will roll over and sleep for days…
27. June 2016 at 15:58
I’m a leftist that likes Trump. Open borders, as Bernie says, is a right wing idea. Trump is also pro-gay and secretly pro-choice. He’s likely to spend massively on infrastructure because it’s in his nature to build things.
Summing it up, Trump will restrict immigration and bad trade deals allowing the wages of workers to rise. He will spend on infrastructure and will keep the current laissez-faire attitude to things sexual. What’s there for a leftist to dislike?
27. June 2016 at 16:05
Art deco….”I’ll consult history, current survey research, and modeling ”
“Junk in junk out… Bias in bias out… ”
You have to have a clue in the first place to effectively… ” consult history, current survey research, and modeling ”
you don’t…
I wonder how long it will take you to glimpse reality…it’s gonna be fun to see a misogynistic bigot like you squirm in denial and cognitive dissonance…
27. June 2016 at 16:09
Now, be nice, Bill, or the group home supervisor may take your computer away.
27. June 2016 at 16:25
I’ve always had this feeling in my gut that Trump was part of a vast left wing conspiracy orchestrated by Hilary to make the opposition look bad. Trump-Hilary-Bill …best friends….I mean Trump and Bill were both on the manifest for Jeffrey Epstein’s Flying Brothel. Daughters are best friends…etc…
Con gullible republicans to vote for him by imitating Ann Coulter… in exchange for a big payout from the Clinton foundation members..
Now he has begun to realize that this has worked beyond anyone’s dreams…and he is trying to backtrack…Kevin Spacy could not have done it better..
27. June 2016 at 16:30
art deco… I’m always nice…I’m just trying to help you work through your insecurities and delusions… Let me assure you…If you detect hostility it all in your head…
So lets begin… why do you think your hatred for your mother is causing you at act out in such inappropriate ways ??? Like Acting out your sexual insecurities on public forums and praising donald trump .?
(And don’t tell me you don’t hate your mother…we can’t make any progress unless you admit you hate your mother…)
27. June 2016 at 20:59
@ssumner,
“You are really out of touch with the left. Sanders is especially hostile to increased immigration, and he dominates the left today.”
Read what numbersusa has to say:
https://www.numbersusa.com/content/elections/races/presidential/2016-presidential-hopefuls.html
They rank Sanders F-, Hillary D-, Trump A-. They don’t agree with you that Sanders is hostile to increased immigration or that Trump is unreliable on the issue.
@Bill Ellis,
“If you are against amnesty you are for expulsion …
you are for creating death and deprivation on a large scale…
you are for dumping millions of people on a nation that can’t possibly handle it…
you are for putting millions of people in camps…”
If you refuse to let homeless people into your house, you are creating homelessness and suffering… This is silly.
“I don’t know why Trump supporters are reassured to find out that the man they want to have his finger on the nuclear trigger is a completely random madman who is utterly unpredictable. And who also has a temper problem and a revenge problem. You are reassured by that?”
I don’t believe Trump is going to start a nuclear war. I could be wrong. I’d bet on it though.
I also expect Trump to be more isolationist and use less military intervention than Hillary. Your named Trump-a-like Berlusconi didn’t start nuclear wars or come close to that.
28. June 2016 at 00:58
He was first elected to public office about 4 years before she was, but their political careers were co-incident.
I did not expect such a comment by you. Bill Clinton was elected in 1976 as Arkansas Attorney General – with no Republican opposition at all. Then in 1978 Clinton was elected Governor of Arkansas. So which election did Hillary win in 1980?
I’d say (from memory) Hillary did not win a relevant public election before 2000 when she became US senator Kirchner style running with the credentials and the name of her husband.
No wonder Trump is losing heavily when even his supporters see it like you do. The next upcoming narrative will be that Bill only won because of Hillary’s name, her credentials and her charisma.
28. June 2016 at 04:08
I did not expect such a comment by you. Bill Clinton was
I was referring to the Kirchners in Argentina.
28. June 2016 at 07:42
Massimo Heitor says…”If you refuse to let homeless people into your house, you are creating homelessness and suffering… This is silly.
Silly ? No. you suffer from logic problems… you have put the cart before the horse…
Actually… if homeless people are already in your house and you force them out into a life threatening environment and they die…that’s on you. And if you and trump force me to kick my fellow humans …our brothers and sisters… out of my house then that’s on you too.. (and to force me to do that you’d have to violate my constitutional rights..)
The morality of the situation aside….you can’t deny that rounding up 12 million people, will result in some combination of dumping millions of people with nothing to their names, in mexico, which would result in a horrific refugee crisis, and locking up millions of people in camps… (remember about 4 million of the unauthorized immigrants are asian.)
Are you just ignorant of what would happen if we did round up 12 million people…or is it that you don’t care ?
Massimo….Are you part of the “they broke the law, so they deserve whatever they get ” camp …or are you happily, now willfully, ignorant ?
Do you deny what would happen…or justify what would happen?
28. June 2016 at 08:37
Massimo says….”I also expect Trump to be more isolationist and use less military intervention than Hillary.
why do you expect this ? It can’t be because of anything trump has said or done.
so when trumps says he’ll take care of Daesh (isil) within a year… you think he’s lying ??…or maybe you just have faith that trump’s manliness will make daesh swoon and follow the donald like his american cult of followers does ?
Did you believe that we’d make a profit on the second gulf war and greeted in Iraq with flowers and candy too ?
how is trump going to make the world “fear america” properly (unlike that “appeaser” Obama ) by being an isolationist ?
Trump is a living rochshar test … What an individual sees in the trump blot has nothing to do with reality…it’s all about projecting your hopes and insecurities onto an amorphous blob in a quest for wishful filament.
28. June 2016 at 08:40
“-Actually, it’s Her who’s done. Even a 3 point popular vote drop from Obama would lead Hillary to lose. And historically, the drop has been greater than this all but twice (once due to the collapse of the Federalists, once due to granting Blacks the vote).”
All the Trumpistas have is propaganda. It’s not worth trying to have a conversation with any of them anymore than it was worthwhile to try to talk to a Soviet apparatchik about economics. It’s all blowhard “Rah, Rah, Rah!”
The polls only matter when they show Trump with a lead or close. No information will convince them that Trump will lose, and if he does lose, they will claim the election was stolen somehow, and/or they will blame the other leaders of the Republican Party for not getting fully behind him. These people are exactly what they appear to be, which as Bruce Bartlett says, the scum of American politics.
Let them have their Fox News fantasies. I have better things to do than engage them anymore.
28. June 2016 at 08:45
Art, You said:
“Actually, he’s like Frank Sinatra.”
For once Art shows he has a sense of humor. Yup, he’s no more sexist than Sinatra.
Philip, You said:
“These posts crack me up. It seems like Art Deco and E. Harding don’t know Scott is trolling.”
I love how they take seriously comments that are obviously intended to be humorous. If one can’t laugh at Trump, then what’s the point of living?
Bob, Hitler wanted to exterminate Jews and invade Poland. Trump does not. Don’t you think those are pretty important differences? Show me the post you have in mind, and I’ll explain. When others accused me of these comparisons it was clear they had missed the nuance of the post. Yes, I jokingly pointed out that he kept a book of Hitler’s speeches by his bedside every night, who can ignore a humorous nugget like that? But I never claimed he’d turn out like Hitler if elected. That’s idiotic. Trump uses many of the stylistic traits of previous fascists, but the US is not about to become a dictatorship.
On the dice roll, the 1990 Gulf War was caused by a dice roll, and likely would never have happened if Bush had told Saddam how he would respond. Putin is far more likely to invade Estonia if he is uncertain of Trump’s reaction, than if he is certain of Hillary’s. But what if Trump doesn’t respond the way Putin assumes?
28. June 2016 at 08:46
Here’s Bartlett once again:
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=f7k7QSeyQIM
Tell me that doesn’t fit the Trumpistas. If we ignore them, they’ll go away eventually. These bigots need to be shunned. One reason why nuts like this think they can take over is that there’s no such thing as public shame anymore.
28. June 2016 at 12:26
“Putin is far more likely to invade Estonia if he is uncertain of Trump’s reaction, than if he is certain of Hillary’s. But what if Trump doesn’t respond the way Putin assumes?”
-Damn, Sumner. You’ve really got some obliviousness in you. What’s there in Estonia for Russia to take? Nothing! The chance of Russia invading any NATO country is 0%, and remains 0% no matter which corrupt hack is POTUS. Putin is not Saddam, Russia is not Iraq, and Estonia is not Kuwait. The analogies don’t remotely fit, Scotty! Not even remotely.
Politics is making you lose dozens upon dozens of IQ points.
It’s sad.
Also, why did you delete my comments? It was you and Ellis who started down this spiral of insults.
I can laugh at Trump. But not if you non-jokingly pretend he’s some kind of threat to this country, which is a ridiculous idea.
Make America Great Again!
28. June 2016 at 12:27
“If we ignore them, they’ll go away eventually.”
#WhiteGenocide
28. June 2016 at 12:33
@Bill Ellis
“Actually… if homeless people are already in your house and you force them out into a life threatening environment and they die…that’s on you.”
That’s actually morally consistent with what you are saying about immigration, but it’s almost completely absurd to just about everyone.
I don’t think I’m begin daft or cute here.
If it’s immoral to deport/eject unwanted immigrants/houseguests who forcefully gained physical entry to a nation/home they were explicitly excluded from, is it immoral to deny them entry? I don’t see how you can logically differentiate the two, but it seems even more absurd to say that a nation has no moral grounds to exclude unwanted immigrants or that a private household has no moral grounds to exclude unwanted houseguests.
Does this logic apply to all nations, not just US, Canada, Europe, and Australia? Japan is ruthless about excluding or at least drastically restricting immigrants that aren’t ethnically Japanese.
28. June 2016 at 12:37
@Bill Ellis,
“why do you expect [limited military engagement] ? It can’t be because of anything trump has said or done.”
It is because of what Trump has said. Predicting what a leader would do is all educated guesses. I completely admit I can’t prove anything, I could be completely wrong, and I’d be happy to place bets. Hillary has a record of being rather hawkish and being a lead supporter of the 2003 Iraq invasion. I don’t think you can prove that we wouldn’t do more of the same.
28. June 2016 at 18:23
Massimo says…Predicting what a leader would do is all educated guesses.
No, Logic fails you again… if you have consistent information about a candidate you can make educated guesses… Trump contradicts himself on everything…He’s white noise. You can’t make an educated guess if your data is all noise… All you can do is pretend to hear things in it.
28. June 2016 at 18:46
Masimo asks…”If it’s immoral to deport/eject unwanted immigrants/houseguests who forcefully gained physical entry to a nation/home they were explicitly excluded from, is it immoral to deny them entry? ”
its not as black and white as you want to make it. It’s situational and must be placed in context…
If you had an unwanted guest in your home who forcefully gained entry…. to avoid being raped.. or sold into sexual slavery, or to escape a natural disaster… then yes…I think you’d be a pretty low form of human to to kick them out of your house
And if someone was banging on your door to avoid these things and you could save them by letting them in and wouldn’t…then yes…you are grossly immoral.
But you are dodging the question… Do you deny the horrible things that would happen if we rounded up 12 million people…..or do justify brutality we would visit upon them ? It’s easy to see the world in black and white in the abstract, but when we get down to the details things get gray..
Can you say…”Yes…I think unauthorized immigrants deserve to be thrown into concentration camps by the millions and to dump millions more across the border to die of thirst and starve. “…or not…because that it what you are advocating… Own it.
29. June 2016 at 04:55
[…] most prescient of Trump commentators in my little bubble has been Scott Sumner. His point all along has been that Trump doesn’t care about anything and is just saying […]
29. June 2016 at 05:16
@Bill Ellis,
It is absurd to say Trump is so random that it’s unreasonable to make any educated guesses about what he would do or how things would play out. Even Sumner is making some educated guesses and discussing some of his worries that Trump may turn the GOP into the neo-reactionary party. You can disagree with my educated guesses of course, my guesses my be wrong of course.
If an unwanted guest forced their way into your home to escape from rape or a mugging or a tornado, it’s quite reasonable to to provide temporary help: call emergency services, maybe give them a fully welcoming place to stay for a few days, and maybe take it a few steps even further. But granting them full permanent membership in a private home for the rest of their lives is completely absurd. And, while I sympathize with most of humanity, I don’t want to be obligated to help every random stranger with every problem they may have.
“But you are dodging the question… Do you deny the horrible things that would happen if we rounded up 12 million people…..or do justify brutality we would visit upon them ?”
No, I do not deny them. Of course, bad things would happen. Bad things are supposed to happen when our legal system issues a punishment to enforce a law. Speeding tickets, for example, are supposed to hurt the people receiving them but may help others in terms of fewer traffic accidents. National borders are supposed to hurt people who want to cross the border and benefit those that don’t want the unwanted immigrants.
Allowing people to own private homes hurts others that would like freer more liberal access to those homes. Enforcing property rights helps those with property and hurts those that would like access to that property.
Also, even under the moral logic that national borders are generally immoral and defending a group culture or identity is immoral as that excludes others, it’s unreasonable to selectively apply this to white Europeans and only white Europeans. Japan and Israel are allowed to hyper aggressively prohibit entry of others who aren’t in their ethnic/religious tribe and deport those who physically gain entry. Gulf states like Saudi Arabia take this much further.
29. June 2016 at 05:57
Freelander said:
“Tell me that doesn’t fit the Trumpistas. If we ignore them, they’ll go away eventually. These bigots need to be shunned. One reason why nuts like this think they can take over is that there’s no such thing as public shame anymore.”
The Trump crowd believes in shame, and they also expect it as a predictable tactic to any reasonable viewpoint they express, so they’ve learned to fight back.
29. June 2016 at 10:18
What’s there in Estonia for Russia to take?
The city of Narva. It’s on the border and filled with Great Russians. It’s more Russian than the Crimea.
29. June 2016 at 10:24
Here’s Bartlett once again:
He’s gotta make rent and his speaking engagements are derived from the rude things he says about Republicans. The ‘former Reagan official’ is his brand. It sounds better than ‘lapsed history teacher who landed a patronage job in the Treasury department’. The National Center for Policy Analysis had a stable of publicists (including Bruce Bartlett) in addition to its academic and professional staff. They canned him when he generated…bad publicity (and they also contend he misled him about what he was doing with his time off).
29. June 2016 at 10:26
Yup, he’s no more sexist than Sinatra.
‘Sexist’ is a cant term. Serious people do not use it nor are they intimidated by it.
29. June 2016 at 10:28
These bigots need to be shunned.
You’re shunning me? Is that a threat or a promise?
29. June 2016 at 10:31
On the dice roll, the 1990 Gulf War was caused by a dice roll, and likely would never have happened if Bush had told Saddam how he would respond.
Bush’s response was contingent on what Congress would tolerate. It’s a reasonable wager the President was inhibited about playing that card.
29. June 2016 at 10:34
All the Trumpistas have is propaganda. It’s not worth trying to have a conversation with any of them anymore
If you subtracted the verbiage you and Tom Brown devote to this sort of bear baiting, you to would be awfully quiet. Do I take you’re decamping to other combozes?
29. June 2016 at 12:38
[…] kinda like Jordan walking by an outdoor basketball court and being challenged by some punk. Well, here ya go. And if you want an example of what I meant when I said Scott has been nodding and winking […]
29. June 2016 at 17:22
OK, Art, that is at least something, but the only reason Russia reunified with Krim was because it was tired of anti-democratic Western games and began treating Ukraine as a potentially hostile West-aligned country that was trying to join NATO, not, as formerly, a neutral partner. Once a country has already joined NATO, there is no use salvaging any bit of it.
29. June 2016 at 17:54
Ah yes, the “nuance” of having no problems with the readers thinking of Hitler when they read the name Trump.
Keep juxtaposing the two names as if they had any relationship, then feign ignorance when you’re called out on your tactic.
Sumner is like Hitler. I say that in a “nuanced” manner.
29. June 2016 at 18:05
Sumner wrote:
That is a lie, because you have mentioned Hitler in your posts about Trump many times, and it was not to distinguish Trump from Hitler, it was to liken them.
I question your judgment if you believe you are forced to choose between supporting 100 rapes a week instead of 200 rapes a week, rather than 100 and ZERO.
YOU are irresponsible and have detestable morals if you believe an individual is obligated to positively support coercion against innocent people on the silly basis that others will likely vote for a lesser or greater evil. That is blaming the victim.
30. June 2016 at 11:04
Looks like Trump lost another one (“or at least, pretty darn close”):
http://www.redstate.com/leon_h_wolf/2016/06/30/yet-another-gop-senator-goes-nevertrump-least-pretty-darn-close/
The list of #NeverTrump Senators really crosses the ideological spectrum at this point, and everyone has different reasons for joining. Mark Kirk is one of the most liberal Republicans in the Senate and he’s on board. Establishment toadies like Lindsay Graham and Dean Heller are both on board. Conservative firebrands like Ben Sasse and (probably) Mike Lee are on board.