• Dan Dredger wrote a new post, Welcome to the age of Trump 4 years, 1 month ago

    By Jonathan Freedland

    It was the night the American media were too demure to call Pussygate. At the time, Donald Trump had won nothing. Twenty-four hours later, he would be celebrating his first victory in the […]

    • one in three US voters would prefer a dictator to democracy


    • Hi Phil [1],

      I wonder how they know about democracy?


    • Stephen of Wimbledon #2
      May 21, 2016 at 4:29 am

      I wonder how they know about democracy?

      I think Faux News etc. regularly explain it to them! 🙂

    • Trump on the stump is the consummate wind up artist; he knows precisely what to say in order to get audiences riled up and shouting back at him in agreement.

      Sam Harris has said that it’s as if the Donald is travelling around in a portable echo chamber.

    • Trump is in part a product of the far left.

      The Trump of four years ago was no different to the Trump of today, a joke. Even those running alongside him were just as batshit crazy as those running with him today, Trump came nowhere. So what has changed?

      Being labeled a racist, bigot, homophobic, transphobic or a racist again when it comes to Islam, in any debate with someone of left leaning if you do not fully accept their views on the matter can get rather tiresome after a while.

      I think Americans are sick and tired of it and trump just so happens to be someone who does not give a fuck what people think of him.

      Pat Condell says it better than I ever could. I vote against you

    • Looking at that woman’s face makes me glad we have an Electoral College with something like 29 states having electors able to vote their conscience.

      That is the function of the Electoral College. Stopping demagogues who have the support of people who are like that woman in the picture.

      Probably not a popular sentiment here. Too bad! Except good for the US.

      Not sure if Trump is that demagogue but I bet he, if elected ( a long shot ), will be the most impeachable president is history.

    • Blue #8
      May 22, 2016 at 11:19 am

      I’ll be voting for Donald Trump, I’m not going to vote for Hillary Rodham Clinton that’s for sure.

      It is a very unfortunate feature of democracy, that people vote against politicians who tell them some things they don’t like to hear, and vote for charlatans who lack any coherent policies or signs of recognising reality, but seek popularity playing to the knee-jerk responses of audiences!
      The UK equivalent of Trump, is Farage!

    • Veggiemanuk

      Being labeled a racist, bigot, homophobic, transphobic or a racist again when it comes to Islam, in any debate with someone of left leaning if you do not fully accept their views on the matter can get rather tiresome after a while.

      Will thats pretty damn definitive.

      Trump it is then! No-one should have to put up with potentially tiresome. Those lefties are (nearly) all the same…

    • The “left” is the cause of all our problems, says Trump. Just another scapegoat, and a way to organize, to consolidate power. Lincoln left something out: you can fool too many of the people too much of the time.
      Of course he is a demagogue, NeoDarwinism; why would you doubt that?

    • Dan

      Phil: Veggie’s argument is feeble.

      Freedland’s piece is an exemplary analysis of the problem. There is nothing frivolous in it.

      Why you cannot distinguish the messengers from their message is quite beyond me….

    • veggiemanuk #6
      May 21, 2016 at 9:17 pm

      Pat Condell says it better than I ever could. I vote against you

      You greatly under-rate yourself, if you think this muppet says anything constructive!

      Better? He just rants that anyone who disagrees with his superficial opinions is as big a moron as he is!

      He also thinks that abusive rhetoric is an argument of substance and consequence!

      I may actually agree with some criticisms he makes of some groups of blindly ideological people, but his reversed ideological bigotry is no better than theirs!

      He may be an atheist, but he is certainly not a rationalist with anything constructive to say!

      I’ll vote for this idiot because I don’t like this other idiot!” is not an intelligent approach!
      It comes back to my earlier comment about negativity and voting for candidates who have nothing to offer, but who massage egos, and avoid triggering negative responses with unpalatable realities!

    • It is a very unfortunate feature of democracy, that people vote against politicians who tell them some things they don’t like to hear, and vote for charlatans who lack any coherent policies or signs of recognising reality, but seek popularity playing to the knee-jerk responses of audiences!
      The UK equivalent of Trump, is Farage!

      To be clear, I am Bernie-or-Bust.

      I think you’re very incorrect. I absolutely can’t stand Trump, but I fucking LOATHE Clinton. To reduce it down to what I like to hear is silly. I’m voting for the least damaging candidate. The way I see it, we have a possible 4-8 year dictator, who will skirt the rules to accomplish goals that will make him internally popular (such as a living wage and rebuilding our infrastructure), or an anointed fascist (corporation-owned) candidate who was really handed a candidacy by the oligarchy who is damaging my demographic of the under-45 middle class. I see one candidate who talks about alleviating student debt in Trump and one who actually created it by making it not bankruptable in the 90’s with Clinton. I see one who talks about bringing jobs home in Trump, and one who campaigned pro-NAFTA in the 90’s with Clinton… who is also pro-TPP. I see one who says he’s open to a possible single payer system but hasn’t decided yet in Trump, and one who says it’ll never happen after receiving a sudden $15m campaign contribution in Clinton.

      So I get it. Racism. Sexism. Shock jock politics. It sucks. Trump is a clown. But… he’s a clown with no record, and that’s far better than a person with a very dangerous record. At the end of the day it’s about HURTING THE ESTABLISHMENT. The Establishment clearly does not like Trump, so I am voting for him. It’s that simple.

      Here’s a list of things I do not agree with that Clinton has done (yes I keep this handy):

      Repealing Glass-Steagall
      Began housing deregulation
      Three strike laws
      Expansion of private prisons
      Expansion of the war on drugs
      Fought for “welfare reform” that hurt minorities
      Removed ability to bankrupt student loans
      Is currently under criminal investigation for the email scandal
      Used said private email server to avoid FOIA
      Voted for the Iraq War
      Sells Iraq War as a “business opportunity”
      Topples Gaddafi, destabilizes Libya
      Overthrew democratically elected government in Honduras
      Fights against minimum wages in Haiti
      Actively pushed for arming “Syrian Rebels” – Totally NOT ISIS
      TPP is the “Gold Standard”
      Late to the gay rights party (I’m leaving DADT out of it)
      Does not honestly support a living minimum wage

      How… the…hell… am I supposed to get behind this person? Huh? This isn’t tinfoil hat stuff. This is stuff SHE HAS DONE!

      So um, yeah. They seem to wanna blame Bernie, but let’s face it, this is entirely Clinton’s problem.

    • Glad you weighed in on Condel, Alan. Like you I agree with some of his concerns but his portrayal of who comprise the opposition, makes him a polarizing idealogue quite as bad as those he complains of.

    • Collin #14

      That’s quite a rap sheet with some pretty major crimes in my book.

      Forgive me not understanding the problems with NAFTA. I thought that was mutually beneficial to the partners?

    • Thanks.

      No, NAFTA is a mixed bag from what I see here with a lot of its problems stemming from ancillary political actions and inactions. I think it is often right to export jobs to poorer countries, lift them and move your own country on to newer endeavours.

      Still, the next seven are utterly egregious for me.

      Given her scummy unprincipled voting in the past, given that she is playing to her gallery rather than anything that looks like a conscience, you still have to make a judgment call. She got a fright from Bernie and started to soften her own tone on more socialist issues. Those voters (well some if not you) may be co-optable. Might she be minded to do some good? The role of the president has been made something of a hobbled farce of late. The country’s journey back from the right of European political and economic right will be quite a schlepp. Trump is a precipice we must go nowhere near. Personal distaste and a feeling of having been defiled from voting for Clinton to hammer home that a US Idiocracy must never happen and would betray the world, is rather what the world needs of you right now. Be brave. Here’s a sick bag.

    • No sign of lessons being learned here either! . . . but Trump’s “Mexican wall”, lowers the bar in terms of international diplomacy even further!

      This … will never happen. There will never be wall. This is not a concern. It just flat-out wont happen. It’s rhetoric he used to get the nutjob right wing vote. The nutjob right wing propped up since the 80’s. This vote is there, and he’s actually bringing them to the middle. Just look at his response to this garbage transgender bathroom issue:

      Trump is a precipice we must go nowhere near. Personal distaste and a feeling of having been defiled from voting for Clinton to hammer home that a US Idiocracy must never happen and would betray the world, is rather what the world needs of you right now.

      How does Clinton solve ANYTHING, though? I just gave you a HUGE list of reasons why she’s very fucking dangerous, not just to the USA, but to the world at large. How exactly would voting FOR her … help… anyone? Furthermore, Trump has a strictly isolationist viewpoint? Isn’t that kinda what the world wants? “Get out of our business, USA!”

      I don’t see the problem here.

      Be brave.

      I am.I am taking a chance that Trump wont fuck things up too bad, because I’m absolutely certain Clinton will.

    • Trump has a strictly isolationist viewpoint? Isn’t that kinda what the world wants?

      No! No!

      Don’t start wars but engage with everyone. The retreat into nationalism and a splendid isolation is the biggest threat we face globally at the moment.

    • Don’t start wars but engage with everyone.

      He says that too! He talks about reaching out to Putin and trying to bridge the gap between Russian and US relations. Putin’s pretty cool with Trump because of that… just read Sputnik News lol…

      I think you misinterpret what I meant. He says want a faster path to legal immigration, but harsher laws on illegal immigration. And the reasoning for this is pretty solid. Long story short, illegal immigrants don’t have to abide by labor laws. As such, they are essentially SLAVE LABOR IN THE USA. I get what he was saying about the rapist comment, because earlier that week we found out that 80% of women who cross into the border illegally are raped along the way. As far as the Mulsims thing, that’s not unheard of, but I agree that blocking them off is unnecessary given the high unlikelihood of death by terrorist attack in the USA.

      When I say isolationist, I mean things like trade laws which hurt the US economy and are paid for by, say, China. China is ok, but they have major issues with interacting with other countries because they decline to change the “Chinese way” of doing things. The TPP is actually a bill which will allow Chinese corporations to dictate US law and bypass things like our own patent system or food and health safety regulations. And it sets up an unprecedented shadow court of self-appointed corporate representatives to do this. It’s the erosion of democracy itself. This is the isolationism I’m talking about. Bad trade deals made at the expense of the American middle class.

      And then there’s also the fact he wants us to stop blowing up goat herders for their oil.

    • Collin.

      What sort of socialist did you say you were?

      Of course he likes Putin. They are each other’s culturally appropriate mirror image. Strong leader make strong country earn’s respect of the world

      Looks like you think he is going to do the business, though, solve problems.

      So once corporations are further de-regulated and Mexico properly laid waste by US agribusiness, what from Clinton’s list of non-war crimes wouldn’t corporate Trump commit and worse at the drop of a hat?

      A Republican Socialist?

      That’s quite some journey you are committing the American people to post-Trump.

      I’m going to read some Trump policy, if anyone’s bothered to write it down.

    • Where do you get your “facts” about Hillary Clinton, Collin, Fox News?
      Phil, I am surprised at you. That list is specious. (He left out Benghazi!)
      I just didn’t like the description by Freedland of Trump as funny. He is not funny.
      I have noting more to say and do not wish to have a dialogue with anyone who would say “I fucking loathe Clinton” or with anyone who would vote for Trump.
      Nothing personal. —Just no money in it.

    • phil rimmer #23
      May 22, 2016 at 5:16 pm

      Of course he likes Putin. They are each other’s culturally appropriate mirror image. Strong leader make strong country earns respect of the world

      He also said he would negotiate with Kim Jong-un of North Korea – and visit the UK (where he is regarded as a bad joke)!

      Looks like you [Collin] think he is going to do the business, though, solve problems.

      He can’t even “do business” with many people in his own party, let alone enter reasonable negotiations abroad!!!

      His attempts at business negotiations (AKA legal bullying) in Scotland were farcical – and thrown out by a succession of courts when he tried to throw his imaginary intellectual weight about!

    • Dan #24

      Phil, I am surprised at you. That list is specious.

      I trust people.

      He lied?

      Please, please set the record straight.

    • The main point this article makes is that the constitutional democracy is one that must be maintained at all costs. The successes of the past two centuries are far more important than the hindsight that always so clearly defines the failed policies of both parties and politicians, far more important than the human flaws of those we opt to temporarily put in charge of protecting those ideals, far more important than even the existing economic and social inequalities. Democracy is successful because it is simply a work in progress, and it has proven to be the best we can do as humans to provide basic rights and freedoms. It doesn’t guarantee its citizens instant gratification but it does give them a platform to work toward the betterment of society from within, giving them the tools to face challenges, and the constitutional boundaries to guide them. Their choice of candidate and party, if they truly believe in this system, should be based upon how closely that candidate and party will carry the standard of that work in progress, and leave the regressive politics of fear, hate and mistrust in its failed past, no more, no less.

    • It wont let me post, this is super annoying. I think it’s the spam filter? No idea.

      Hey here’s the list with ALLL the links (this is a pastebin, it’s safe):

      Allllll sources cited. I made this just for you, Dan. It tooks me a long time and I had to do it twice because the first submission didn’t go through. As you can see, I did not lie, I did not make this up, and I’m not watching conservative news networks. So please, tell me what is so “specious” about this list.

    • Collin,
      Just questioning.
      Those sources you sent me, by the way, are mostly short YouTube videos and short news clips. I took a look: not very impressive.
      Specious (I think) means plausible but wrong, or misleading. No one’s accusing anyone of lying.
      Why shouldn’t I question all those claims and accusations? They should be questioned. You take a heap of complex issues, and controversies, make a list and say here are her misdeeds? That’s too easy.
      Judging from some of the appalling comments under the videos I think some of the people watching and posting those are just filled with hate.
      Phil, you can do your own research. I’ll do mine. Trust people? I thought you liked evidence.
      I agree that she is a deeply flawed woman. Voting for the Iraq war was a bad mistake. I also think she is highly capable, basically decent, and has been maligned.
      I need to research some of this. Hard to do. Everyone is biased. The web, the news media in general, has something for everyone.
      I’ll check out what you sent and then see what I can find out. The little that I watched and read proved nothing.

    • I took a look: not very impressive.

      They’re direct quotes. They’re backing up what I claimed she says/said. Or explaining what’s going on.

      I just think it’s odd I have to cite what anyone who has been monitoring the news for the past 20 years should know. I don’t see how you can blame Phil for knowing that what I said was absolutely correct… at least partially or mostly.

      Judging from some of the appalling comments under the videos I think some of the people watching and posting those are just filled with hate.

      Welcome to YouTube, buddy. It’s like that … everywhere…. on YouTube. Everywhere. No one is immune.

      Phil, you can do your own research. I’ll do mine. T

      I’ve yet to see you do any research. I just see you criticising mine. You’re welcome by the way. I put a quite a bit into making sure you got caught up.

      Seems to me that Phil has already done his research.

      Anyway, good luck with your uh, research and uh, healthy skepticism. Whatever you decide about this stuff, at least now you’ll know the background on why we Bernie-or-Bust people aren’t crazy or selfish or throwing a fit. We have an issue with Hillary Clinton, and we can back up those issues.

    • Moderator message

      A couple of things:

      1. Comments containing multiple links are put aside by the spam filter pending moderator approval. There is no need to resubmit them, as they will be approved as soon as one of us in online.

      2. A reminder that the aim here is for thoughtful discussion. Users are free to disagree with others as much as they like, but not to be rude or personally hostile to them. No name-calling, no asides doubting their intelligence. It is the arguments that carry weight here, not personal comments about other users.

      Thank you.

      The mods

    • Trump positions-

      How many here find this tattered little collection consistent with building a fairer society?

      How is this possibly lower risk given socialist desires???

    • Thanks, Collin, for taking the time to put that material together. And yes, that’s true about YouTube. But a lot of that stuff is Bill Clinton talking, and these clips from the Young Turks and the little debate clips and news clips, just don’t it for me. They are out of context. You are just giving me a few bits of commentary and some fragments of dialogue from the Secretary in the 90s about crime, etc.
      I could present a set of clips and articles too supporting claims that someone else’s claims are distorted. Some things are black and white. Most things aren’t. There are not always two sides to every question, but most of the time there are.
      For example, on minimum wage (which is one your “definitive” examples of her Badness which you “prove” by showing her getting booed at the debate in NY) Hillary had this to say. Here’s a short article from the Huffington Post. You are free to reject it or not, as I am free to accept or question or reject your stuff.
      Best Wishes. DR

    • Phil Rimmer #33

      Almost a death knell for the human species.

      There’s more at stake than getting or not getting a “fairer society.”

      “What effect would electing Donald Trump have?”

      “It’s hard to say because we don’t really know what he thinks. And I’m not sure he knows what he thinks. He’s perfectly capable of saying contradictory things at the same time. But there are some pretty stable elements of his ideology, if you can even grant him that concept. One of them is: “Climate change is not taking place.” As he puts it: “Forget it.” And that’s almost a death knell for the species – not tomorrow, but the decisions we take now are going to affect things in a couple of decades, and in a couple of generations it could be catastrophic.”
      —Noam Chomsky

    • @ Dan

      That demagogue.

      I meant the demagogue that would cause a large shift in the Electoral College voting and deny said demagogue the Presidency. I’m not sure Trump is that one but I could be wrong.

      P.S. That’s,


    • Bonnie #34


      Yes the down-home Good Wife.

      I’d vote Alicia Florrick in a flash

    • Dan #37

      Indeed, Dan, there is no policy to speak of, no clue of what a fatuously rich oaf, product of property and corporate America might even care about except more of the same.

      This is a man to tickle the selfish glands of the stupid and make problems go away. Nothing banishes fears like denying there may be anything to be fearful of.

      I remain curious about an avowed socialist’s thinking, however.

      Maybe Clinton has learned a bit from her truly egregious mistakes. She wasn’t alone in making them. Democrats were too often scum except for that nice Jed Bartlet. Maybe she knows she has a lot to undo to restore the Clinton name and legacy.

      Trump wouldn’t mind if his name were forever celebrated by the other primates for giving them a chance.

    • @ Phil #40

      I liked your comment. I don’t think that it would be more of the same, however. That’s the best case scenario.

      “I remain curious about an avowed socialist’s thinking, however.”

      Which “socialist” are you referring to? Me? Sanders?

      (Watching Ann Coulter right now. Do you know her? My God!)

    • Collin’s!

    • @ Collin

      Your’e in good company. My mother called me a fool when I told her I was voting for Clinton rather than Sanders in the NY primary, and my twelve year old niece begged me to vote for Bernie.


    • OHooligan #45
      May 23, 2016 at 11:51 pm

      Another example of Trump Hypocrisy:

      Rich buffoons like Trump, have no problem with self contradiction, as they dismiss wider views and learn nothing! Conflicting information has already been dismissed and forgotten, by the time the contradictory information is expediently asserted as flavour of the day!

      Their brains work on a kind of tunnel vision of self-centred profit, while they ignore, deny, and dispute, everything outside that small-minded objective!

    • OHooligan #45
      May 23, 2016 at 11:51 pm


      The coastal erosion of Trump’s Irish golf course, suggests that the Earth’s climate is unimpressed by his denials of rising sea-levels and global warming!

    • Collin’s take on AGW would be interesting right now….

      Collin? Trump, still the lower risk bet?

      Have we seen for ourselves the democratic catastrophe of an under-informed populace, ill served and partially so by their fourth estate?

      And “Socialist”? Is this here just another American “Badge of Goodness” to cover a gnawing guilt like “Christian”?


    • Learn it from Chomsky

      AMY GOODMAN: I wanted to move back to the United States, to the issue of the Republican Party and what you see happening there, the Republican establishment fiercely opposed to the presumptive nominee. I don’t know if we’ve ever seen anything like this, although that could be changing. Can you talk about the significance—I mean, you have Sheldon Adelson, who is now saying he will pour, what, tens of millions of dollars into Donald Trump. You have the Koch brothers—I think it was Charles Koch saying he could possibly see supporting Hillary Clinton, if that were the choice, with Donald Trump. What is happening?

      NOAM CHOMSKY: Well, first of all, the phenomenon that we’ve just seen is an extreme version of something that’s been going on just for years in the Republican primaries. Take a look back at the preceding ones. Every time a candidate came up from the base—Bachmann, McCain, Santorum, Huckabee, one crazier than the other—every time one rose from the base, the Republican establishment sought to beat them down and get their own—get their own man—you know, Romney. And they succeeded, until this year. This year the same thing happened, and they didn’t succeed. The pressure from the base was too great for them to beat it back. Now, that’s the disaster that the Republican establishment sees. But the phenomenon goes way back. And it has roots. It’s kind of like jihadis: You have to ask about the roots.

      What are the roots? The Republican—both political parties have shifted to the right during the neoliberal period—the period, you know, since Reagan, goes back to late Carter, escalated under Reagan—during this period, which has been a period of stagnation and decline for much of the population in many ways—wages, benefits, security and so on—along with enormous wealth concentrated in a tiny fraction of the population, mostly financial institutions, which are—have a dubious, if not harmful, role on the economy. This has been going on for a generation. And while this has been happening, there’s a kind of a vicious cycle. You have more concentration of wealth, concentration of political power, legislation to increase concentration of wealth and power, and so on, that while that’s been going on, much of the population has simply been cast aside. The white working class is bitter and angry, for lots of reasons, including these. The minority populations were hit very hard by the Clinton destruction of the welfare system and the incarceration rules. They still tend to support the Democrats, but tepidly, because the alternative is worse, and they’re taking a kind of pragmatic stand.

      But while the parties have shifted to—but the parties have shifted so far to the right that the—today’s mainstream Democrats are pretty much what used to be called moderate Republicans. Now, the Republicans are just off the spectrum. They have been correctly described by leading conservative commentators, like Norman Ornstein and Thomas Mann, as just what they call a radical insurgency, which has abandoned parliamentary politics. And they don’t even try to conceal it. Like as soon as Obama was elected, Mitch McConnell said, pretty much straight out, “We have only one policy: make the country ungovernable, and then maybe we can somehow get power again.” That’s just off the spectrum.

      Now, the actual policies of the Republicans, whether it’s Paul Ryan or Donald Trump, to the extent that he’s coherent, Ted Cruz, you pick him, or the establishment, is basically enrich and empower the very rich and the very powerful and the corporate sector. You cannot get votes that way. So therefore the Republicans have been compelled to turn to sectors of the population that can be mobilized and organized on other grounds, kind of trying to put to the side the actual policies, hoping, the establishment hopes, that the white working class will be mobilized to vote for their bitter class enemies, who want to shaft them in every way, by appealing to something else, like so-called social conservatism—you know, abortion rights, racism, nationalism and so on. And to some extent, that’s happened. That’s the kind of thing that Fritz Stern was referring to in the article that I mentioned about Germany’s collapse, this descent into barbarism. So what you have is a voting base consisting of evangelical Christians, ultranationalists, racists, disaffected, angry, white working-class sectors that have been hit very hard, that are—you know, not by Third World standards, but by First World standards, we even have the remarkable phenomenon of an increase in mortality among these sectors, that just doesn’t happen in developed societies. All of that is a voting base. It does produce candidates who terrify the corporate, wealthy, elite establishment. In the past, they’ve been able to beat them down. This time they aren’t doing it. And that’s what’s happening to the so-called Republican Party.

      We should recognize—if we were honest, we would say something that sounds utterly shocking and no doubt will be taken out of context and lead to hysteria on the part of the usual suspects, but the fact of the matter is that today’s Republican Party qualify as candidates for the most dangerous organization in human history. Literally. Just take their position on the two major issues that face us: climate change, nuclear war. On climate change, it’s not even debatable. They’re saying, “Let’s race to the precipice. Let’s make sure that our grandchildren have the worst possible life.” On nuclear war, they’re calling for increased militarization. It’s already way too high, more than half the discretionary budget. “Let’s shoot it up.” They cut back other resources by cutting back taxes on the rich, so there’s nothing left. There’s been nothing this—literally, this dangerous, if you think about it, to the species, really, ever. We should face that.

    • Trump isn’t better or worse than Clinton as a person. However, Trump represents Trump and he got to where he is through popular opinion out-valuing the propaganda machine set up by the oligarchical establishment. That, alone, is quite impressive… to me at least. All that aside, he’s just as terrible as Clinton. There’s no difference. Both will say what they want, both are filthy and crooked, both use dirty and reprehensible tactics to get votes, both are going to completely fuck this country up in my mind.

      The difference is that Trump relies on popularity with voters to win and Clinton relies on popularity with big corporate interests. Voting Trump is a blow to those corporate interests who raped the environment (like fracking companies she encouraged), harvest the middle class’s income (like student loan, banking, and health insurance companies currently do), and cause political havoc worldwide (like Clinton actually does). They undermine our votes because they think theirs is better.

      Well I don’t.

      The Establishment created a monster in Trump. For decades they bred hatred and radicalism in the right and profited from it by using it to control the message.

      The message is out of control.

      Let them eat the shit they made.

      Vote Trump.

      Electing Clinton just encourages this behavior and they will close whatever flaws in the system of control they have after this election. Our only hope is to send them a message. NO MORE!

      Both Trump and Clinton are dangerous for America… but if I had to pick one, I pick the one that also fucks over the people who got us into this mess… The Establishment.

    • Anarchy is indeed a strategy…

      Oh and my kids thank you for this profundity.

    • @ Trump supporters

      That confusion is exactly what Trump is counting on! He is fooling them all! He IS the establishment, in the worst sense!

      Read. Learn.

      “Now, the actual policies of the Republicans, whether it’s Paul Ryan or Donald Trump, to the extent that he’s coherent, Ted Cruz, you pick him, or the establishment, is basically enrich and empower the very rich and the very powerful and the corporate sector. You cannot get votes that way. So therefore the Republicans have been compelled to turn to sectors of the population that can be mobilized and organized on other grounds, kind of trying to put to the side the actual policies, hoping, the establishment hopes, that the white working class will be mobilized to vote for their bitter class enemies, who want to shaft them in every way, by appealing to something else, like so-called social conservatism.” […]

    • Alan4discussion #39
      May 23, 2016 at 6:17 pm

      I live a few miles away from Trump’s golf course at Balmedie. He’s a complete joke round here. An ignorant bullying buffoon who’s wasted millions in court fighting this windfarm which no one else cares about. The entire landscape is full of the things nowadays. You barely even notice them. I actually quite like them. Especially the really big majestic ones humming round very slowly, maybe one rotation every two or three seconds. There’s two small ones in the field next to my house about 50 yards away. I can just hear them in the garden if the wind is blowing towards me. Four or five more looking south out of the lounge window. Three huge ones to the north just over the hill. More where I walk the dog. They’re no more intrusive than electricity pylons really.

      I think what it demonstrates is Trump’s obsession with getting his own way and his hatred of anyone disagreeing with him. All it takes is a Twitter comment about him and he lashes out wildly. Imagine that ego with a finger on the nuclear button. He has no real organisation, the insane Ben Carson vetting VP candidates for him, every time I look at who’s running things in his campaign it seems to have changed. I still can’t really get my head round why he’s in this election. No chance of winning but I suppose he’ll go down in memory for more than Trump Tower now so it’s probably just ego. It’s just scary that the USA is so disfunctional that people think this is a viable candidate for the Presidency. He’s a laughing stock in every other country.

    • He’s a smart enough psychopath to know how to disguise some of it….but not fully smart enough given his emotional development is stuck at 17 years of age.

    • Arkird,

      I don’t think he has no chance. He does have a chance. Anyone who’s gotten as far as he has in this process has a chance. You can fool too many of the people too much of the time. Look at Hitler’s rise to power. They said the very same thing. No chance. Trump has not advocated genocide, but telling a huge rally the other day that there is no global warming is every bit as crazy. Every damned bit. A man like that getting this far is unprecedented in this nation’s history. These extremists, these right wing extremist assholes, have always been around but they have never gotten this far. Never.

    • Alan

      I was just saying that Trump denies global warming and that that’s crazy and puts us all in terrible danger, and that he does stand a chance of winning.

    • This is no joke. We should all be scared as hell. And I would have a moratorium on all jokes about Trump. But the late night talk show guys will be out of a job; and it’s their job to lull us into a state of tranquility. Even Bill Maher might want to shut the fuck up at this point. There’s nothing funny about this situation, and it is almost indecent to make jokes as we face, at long last, the end of American civilization as we know it.

      I think I agree with Chomsky: the Republican party, now led by Trump, is no longer a political party; it has morphed into a radical insurgency. The dismantling of the government is what they really want, in favor of wealth concentrated at the top, and increased militarization. It might really be the beginning of the end: civil uprisings, martial law, climate change related disaster, and quite possibly use of nuclear weapons.

      All the angry, disenfranchised people, the lumpenproletariat, who are against the establishment and supporting Trump, will be missing Obama, and berating themselves for their decision not to vote for Clinton. You wait and see. When the chaos sets in they’ll be running around like chickens without heads and wondering what had happened.

      If Trump is elected all bets are off. Nightmare time.

    • If Trump is elected all bets are off. Nightmare time.

      The problem is, the same is true for Clinton.

    • PS Trump has support in every GOP demographic, not just lumpenproletariat, in other words unemployed.

      True, true…the same is true…Everything is true, true, true… until it isn’t true.

      Clinton would be like Obama. Perhaps worse. But she’s not insane; she doesn’t want to get rid of the Affordable Care Act, does not deny global warming, is not a crypto-fascist, blood-thirsty war monger in bed with the NRA like that vile scumbag Trump, and don’t kid yourself that she is (in spite of her hawkish positions in the past).

      Here’s my list (from an article by Chomsky)

      “Trump says all sorts of things,” Noam Chomsky reminded us. “Some of them make sense; Some of them are crazy. But the U.S. is an extremely powerful state [and] if Trump means what he’s saying, the human species is in very deep trouble.”

      Here are his top five reasons why.

      Global warming would continue to affect vulnerable areas.

      “Global warming is a hugely significant phenomenon; the effects of global warming are extremely severe. The Republican Party, Trump in particular, will block measures to stop production from coal plants. Trump simply says, ‘It’s not happening.’ That’s quite apart from other policies he’s advocating,” Chomsky explained.

      Torture would increase.

      “Trump said, ‘Fine, let’s torture people,’” Chomsky said. “In fact, the kind of torture that’s outlawed by international law and became international scandal—waterboarding—he said ‘that’s the least of it, let’s do more.’”

      Refugees would be disregarded as an external problem.

      Trump had a radical response to the Paris attacks last year. “‘Let’s keep all Muslims out of the country’ [Trump said], Let’s build a wall, or rather let’s get Mexico to build a wall to prevent people from fleeing into the United States,” Chomsky reminded us. “Now, where are they fleeing from? Mostly from Central America where they’re fleeing from the results of our policies.”

      Race relations would plummet.

      “The people flocking to Trump’s banner are the people for whom the death rate is actually increasing,” Chomsky notes. “They have seen themselves as having their lives taken away from them, their dignity taken away, the possibilities for the future taken away. That has happened before in the past and the outcomes were not pretty.”

      World war would be ever looming. “American-run polls show that the U.S is the greatest threat to world peace by a large margin. Right now the spectacle of the Republican primary is frightening people around the world, justifiably.”

    • Re: Trump too horrifying for Stephen King / Writers against Trump

    • Pinball1970 #65
      May 31, 2016 at 8:00 am

      We have to get used to the idea he could win it.

      I was listening to a comedy program last night – and some of the comedians suggested that the Canadians should be building a wall along the border, to contain the flood of Americans trying to escape if Trump wins the presidency!

    • Dan #68
      Jun 1, 2016 at 12:47 pm


      Trump is honest? What does that mean, that he isn’t lying when he says that he doesn’t believe in climate change? That’s honest, yes, if he believes that, and profoundly stupid and a lie at the same time.

      I think there is some confusion between honesty and sincerity! – The delusional are very sincere in their beliefs!

    • Surely no less a knob than Ronald Reagan, Bush Senior and Bush Junior. If you added up their IQ’s I reckon it would be a double digit prime number at the most, ahh but which one.

    • Diogenes

      Trump is honest? What does that mean, that he isn’t lying when he says that he doesn’t believe in climate change? That’s honest, yes, if he believes that, and profoundly stupid and a lie at the same time. And it’s honest if someone says they want to commit genocide. And If someone says they hate spicks and kikes and niggers, that could be what they actually mean and therefore considered honest too. Bravo!!

      I can’t stand looking at his face and listening to his voice anymore. Enough is enough.

      I am so sick of the Hillary bashing that is out there. It’s absolutely disgusting. They’re still talking about white-water, even though her enemies spent millions on that and it eventually led to nothing, was all bullshit. Binghaze was Fox News generated bullshit all along and the email thing is nothing.

      Trump denies global warming, wants to get rid of “ObamaCare”, and is pro-life (which is what we all need), wants to increase the military budget, and probably really is a racist. Someone interviewed Hawking last night, said he understands the universe, but can he explain Trump’s rise to success. Stephen Hawking said: “I-can’t-He-is-a dem-a-gogue, ap-peals-to-the-lo-west-com-mon-de-nom-i-nator.” Head on.

      Don’t be fooled by libertarians. It is now a very wicked political philosophy. They are against regulations, believe that private citizens can discriminate, are against environmental protection, are for corporate tyranny. They sound reasonable on foreign policy, and that draws people in. They are a bunch of sickos, are to the right of Cruz and that hill-billy McConnell. (“Who’s gonna pay for it?”) I hate and fear libertarians and I hate Trump, and like Hillary. And I’m right and everyone else is wrong.

      As for Sanders. He’s fine but there’s always someone like him who wants to be the outsider who saves the day. Gerry Brown was the exact same way, said the exact same things, about corporate money, finance, the whole spiel, lost to Clinton, never endorsed him, and then twenty years later wanted Bill’s endorsement for Gov. Bill endorsed him. Now Brown just endorsed Hillary.

      (Ralph Nadar’s lost his mind, or so it seems; he sounded senile, likes libertarians now, thinks they are anti-corporate. Third-party candidates of the past and present seem a little nuts, but not always.)

      Hillary 2016! Yay!

    • M27 Holts, others

      Quantitatively worse than Reagan and Bush. There has been a shift. (Nothing to do with IQ either.) The Republican party has “drifted off the spectrum.”
      Short article by Amy Goodman/Democracy Now, from Sept, 2015. This pretty much says it all:

    • Dan
      I feel your pain.

      Ever seen the movie Idiocracy? I think you should watch it. All will be explained in those two hours. The idiocracy is upon us.

      Available on DVD from Netflix. They don’t stream it.

    • @ Laurie

      I’ll check it out, Laurie. Thank you. But as I said (#60) I think we’ve done a pretty good job ridiculing the Right over the years. Where has it gotten us? I enjoy Bill Mayer and other political humorists, just like anyone else. But the situation is so precarious, frightening and serious right now, and there’s so much at stake, that I almost feel like the time for ridicule has come to an end.

      This’ll never happen, but perhaps there should be a moratorium on jokes about Mr. Trump; comedians should stop making jokes, at least until, ”God willing” (part of the language), a Democrat gets in. That’s how serious I think this is.

      Btw, I have a good Chomsky quote further up (49).

    • Dan

      Oh yes, don’t worry I’m with you on this. I’m so disgusted I can’t even watch the news anymore. Maybe just for ten minutes and then I need respite. I wonder if Brits and Aussies can even understand our despair. Not sure. Canadians must get an earful of the bizarre bullshit south of their border.

      What else can we do but jeer at Trump the ass clown? I don’t know what else to do!

      I like the Chomsky quote and I read the alternet article too. Thank Zeus for Chomsky (figure of speech)

    • Trump is funny in much the same way that the Charlie Chaplin movie “The Great Dictator” is funny.

      As in, we’d much prefer it if he was just a joke. A practical joke on all of us, not so much.

      It’ll take Lisa Simpson in the White House to clear up the mess he leaves. And that’s looking on the optimistic side.

    • @ Bonnie 76

      Horrible picture. Deeply offensive. Why would you post that?
      Neither ironic nor funny. Just plain distorted and sick.
      Isn’t there enough hate? Do we need to see that?

    • I meant #78, and I am referring to the “picture” I saw when I clicked on the name Clinton. I didn’t mean Chaplin’s film The Great Dictator, obviously. That’s a great movie, with a great message. Everyone should see it.

    • Some foolish people have been attacking Trump supporters. In the news.

      That’s great fodder for Trump. (“Look at those animals.”) You don’t do that during an election. My hunch is that a few of them are on his payroll. Maybe most of them. Maybe none of them are in cahoots with him. Either way, it’s good for Trump.

      Okay to revile Trump, but no protesting and certainly no vandalism or violence during an election. That’s activism 101.

    • Dan replied 4 years ago
    • I’m re-reading William L. Shirer’s “The Rise and Fall of the Third Reich: A History of Nazi Germany”. It’s been a while. It’s a very scary story. Hitler was enormously popular in Germany, until it was too late to voice any hint of dissent.

      Dan, I found “The Great Dictator” very very unfunny. I was appalled by it, it actually made me feel sick. Knowing, with historical hindsight, the nature of the beast being lampooned. Not Chaplin’s best by any means.

    • Dan replied 4 years ago


      I understand. Chaplin said he would not have made it had he know what he later learned.

      But the film remains a very powerful and at times very funny movie. It drags a bit.

      Jackie Oakie is great as Mussolini.

      Speech at the end is classic. Saw a revival many years ago. Audience cheered. Many in tears.

    • Chaplin said he would not have made it had he know what he later learned.

      Thank you Dan, I didn’t know that. I might just grit my teeth and give it another go.

    • Dan replied 4 years ago

      If you do, you really should see it till the end. The speech towards the end and the final scene must be seen.

    • For the time-challenged, or the impatient, skip direct to the final speech:

      Not sure about the backing music, it does seem to work but it’s somewhat anachronistic.

      But, yes, what a speech. Now I’m going to watch the whole movie, I don’t think I made it to the end last time (a long time ago).

    • This is why we need a democrat in office. (I have no respect for those who supported Sanders but will not vote for either candidate in this election, and I will not hesitate to excoriate those weak, sniveling, chicken-headed goldfish masquerading as shrewd people who are somehow more discerning than the rest of us. They are either low-information voters or libertarians. (Or both.) Voting is for adults citizens, obviously. Grown ups vote. If they don’t vote they are just sophomoric, uninformed, willfully ignorant, dead weight!! They are passively subjecting themselves to unseen whims and clandestine machinations. As long as they eschew enlightenment and give up their voice they need to be relegated to a playpen with a giant baby pacifier to suck on.

      The Koch brothers love Trump’s likely VP choice. And they are the republican party. Here is their agenda, here is why we need a democrat.

      From the (former) Sanders campaign:

      What Do the Koch Brothers Want?

      As a result of the disastrous Citizens United Supreme Court decision, billionaires and large corporations can now spend an unlimited amount of money to influence the political process.

      Perhaps, the biggest winners of Citizens United are Charles and David Koch, owners of the second-largest privately run business in America Koch Industries.

      Among other things, the Koch brothers own oil refineries in Texas, Alaska, and Minnesota and control some 4,000 miles of pipeline.

      According to Forbes Magazine, the Koch brothers are now worth $80 billion, and have increased their wealth by $12 billion since last year alone.

      For the Koch brothers, $80 billion in wealth, apparently, is not good enough. Owning the second largest private company in America is, apparently, not good enough. It doesn’t appear that they will be satisfied until they are able to control the entire political process.

      It is well known that the Koch brothers have provided the major source of funding to the Tea Party and want to repeal the Affordable Care Act.

      In other words, the agenda of the Koch brothers is not only to defund Obamacare. The agenda of the Koch brothers is to repeal every major piece of legislation that has been signed into law over the past 80 years that has protected the middle class, the elderly, the children, the sick, and the most vulnerable in this country.

      It is clear that the Koch brothers and other right wing billionaires are calling the shots and are pulling the strings of the Republican Party.

      What else do the Koch brothers want?

      Here are just a few excerpts of the Libertarian Party platform that David Koch ran on in 1980. He has not changed one bit.

      “We urge the repeal of federal campaign finance laws, and the immediate abolition of the despotic Federal Election Commission.”

      “We favor the abolition of Medicare and Medicaid programs.”

      “We oppose any compulsory insurance or tax-supported plan to provide health services, including those which finance abortion services.”

      “We also favor the deregulation of the medical insurance industry.”

      “We favor the repeal of the fraudulent, virtually bankrupt, and increasingly oppressive Social Security system. Pending that repeal, participation in Social Security should be made voluntary.”

      “We propose the abolition of the governmental Postal Service. The present system, in addition to being inefficient, encourages governmental surveillance of private correspondence. Pending abolition, we call for an end to the monopoly system and for allowing free competition in all aspects of postal service.”

      “We oppose all personal and corporate income taxation, including capital gains taxes.”

      “We support the eventual repeal of all taxation.”

      “As an interim measure, all criminal and civil sanctions against tax evasion should be terminated immediately.”

      “We support repeal of all law which impede the ability of any person to find employment, such as minimum wage laws.”

      “We advocate the complete separation of education and State. Government schools lead to the indoctrination of children and interfere with the free choice of individuals. Government ownership, operation, regulation, and subsidy of schools and colleges should be ended.”

      “We condemn compulsory education laws … and we call for the immediate repeal of such laws.”

      “We support the repeal of all taxes on the income or property of private schools, whether profit or non-profit.”

      “We support the abolition of the Environmental Protection Agency.”

      “We support abolition of the Department of Energy.”

      “We call for the dissolution of all government agencies concerned with transportation, including the Department of Transportation.”

      “We demand the return of America’s railroad system to private ownership. We call for the privatization of the public roads and national highway system.”

      “We specifically oppose laws requiring an individual to buy or use so-called “self-protection” equipment such as safety belts, air bags, or crash helmets.”

      “We advocate the abolition of the Federal Aviation Administration.”

      “We advocate the abolition of the Food and Drug Administration.”

      “We support an end to all subsidies for child-bearing built into our present laws, including all welfare plans and the provision of tax-supported services for children.”

      “We oppose all government welfare, relief projects, and ‘aid to the poor’ programs. All these government programs are privacy-invading, paternalistic, demeaning, and inefficient. The proper source of help for such persons is the voluntary efforts of private groups and individuals.”

      “We call for the privatization of the inland waterways, and of the distribution system that brings water to industry, agriculture and households.”

      “We call for the repeal of the Occupational Safety and Health Act.”

      “We call for the abolition of the Consumer Product Safety Commission.”

      “We support the repeal of all state usury laws.”

    • Terrifying, Dan.

      This is the ultimate anti expert-as-civil-servant philosophy. As we now know from the work of mathematicians, those with more money will always have better odds in the market, which is why the rich wish for everything to be in it. Why the state should not act as the insurer against misfortune and unfairness of last resort, ( it being ideally placed to do so and while not subject to the forces of the market specifically is held on the tighter leash of democratic process), is explained away by some fear mongering about the tendency of states to bloat and become evil. Why this favouring of the inevitable and unfettered inequality is explained as good is because of some flimsy theory of the unrivalled productivity of great wealth over a more collegiate actvity and trickle down will happen. We know now, decades after Reaganomics, and the mathematicians proofs of gambling with bigger chips, that only trickle up happens. The ideology of greed is busted. We know from the evidence that all social outcomes, societal wealth and robustness are enhanced in more equal societies.