Luke Ford

Comments to Steve Sailer:

* The Republican Presumptive Nominee keeps racking up even bigger victories.

The Democratic Presumptive Nominee keeps losing primaries?

* Trump is sitting pretty and looking good with everyone he needs except suburban women…Hillz and the Dems supporting her sure have a lot of dangling swords to worry about. They have to hope for:
No serious charges in her email scandal, that Russia doesn’t leak hacked emails from her server to swing the election, that no Muslim terror attack(s) happen, that her health holds up, that Bernie can be put to bed and the Super delegates don’t suddenly switch, that the bernouts don’t chimpout at the convention, that Obama gets on the ship, that Trump doesn’t loudly start demanding the Jeffrey Epstein sex tapes sitting in Florida be checked for Bill’s appearances, that her various 80s interviews talking about freeing a guilty rapist as a trial layer don’t surface, and, finally, that her various speeches to wall street pledging allegiance aren’t leaked…Am I missing anything?

* To be fair to Ted Cruz though, he does much better in states that don’t indulge this antiquated custom of holding elections.

* Remember: Trump’s a shark. He’s also future obsessed in all of his thinking (like all the best real estate people). He’s also a longtime reality TV star who can’t be branded by the msm. Essentially he’s the opposite of George W Bush.

Remember: Hillary is the weakest candidate since Dukakis. Media screams about Trump’s problem with women meanwhile Hillary is getting trounced with men voters.

* And yet Trump only got 74.6% of the aggregate Republican vote. That means the transgendered block must have broke hard for Cruz.

By the way, World War T is getting pretty real in North Carolina. Can’t wait for the Nullification Crisis of 2016 over the Toilet of Abominations with North Carolina replacing South Carolina from 1832 Nullification Crisis. Just further proof that Trump is our Andrew Jackson reincarnate.

* Does Trump have anything to worry about?

* If his expectations are comfortably low (losing in a landslide while facing years of legal problems from the dirt his opponents will have dug up on him), then I think he has nothing to worry about, because anything that happens could only improve his chances.

* But while Trump’s negatives right now are higher, they are *not* as locked in. They are based on (my guess):
— history as bombastic TV showman
— his rude remarks (about appearance and such–unappealing to a lot of women)
— media attacks as “Hitler”
Trump can’t change his TV history, but people can re-evaluate how relevant it is. He can avoid nasty remarks that are not on substance or Hillary’s actual incompetence\sleazy dealings. He can carry himself as a crusader, fun, lively, tough, hard hitting–but a more presidential one.

Most of he can take on the “Trump is Hitler” thing. I can imagine a single response on the immigration question at the 1st debate:
— Hillary thinks our college graduates are getting too many job offers at too high pay, so they need more foreign competition
— Hillary thinks our low-wage workers are getting paid too much, so they need even more illegals crossing the border to compete with them for jobs and keep their wages down
— Hillary thinks her rich WallStreet buddies funding her campaign aren’t making enough money and American working people are making too much, so we need more foreigners coming in to keep wages down and profits up.
— I don’t think any of that crap. I’m a rich guy who actually *loves* America and Americans. I think American jobs *belong* to Americans. I think high wages are good–prosperity for Americans. I think *honest* businessmen can make a profit without importing cheap foreign labor. I think our economy–and business–can roar ahead with higher wages for hard working Americans and prosperity for all Americans … not just Hillary’s sleazy WallStreet and Washington cheap-foreign labor loving cronies.

Trump realistically probably only has one great chance to flip the perception and win it–the first debate. But I think something like that above would do it.

My key point: Hillary is the *known* bad choice. Trump still has the opportunity to frame himself as a good choice.

* Queen Hill has to have a POC on the ticket to keep the circular firing squad from breaking out, which it’s going to do after her in any event.

* Interesting meme by Obama, the “you didn’t build that” thing, or in this case the “you just lucky if you be successful” thing. Notice how he keeps coming back to this. How is it that no one calls him on this, which is in fact a full-throated endorsement of HBD. Why don’t they “Watson” him, I wonder.

By logical extension he’s saying that of course the “blank slate” is a myth, and if you’re lucky enough to be born to a high-IQ family, you basically have it made. Success is expected – and not of your own doing, being merely a consequence of your (dare I say it) superior IQ.

Michael Hirsch writes for Politico: For all the lamentation about the level of rhetoric in this Trumped-up election year, the race between Donald Trump and all-but-certain Democratic nominee Hillary Clinton is already shaping up to be a debate over America’s global role of the kind we haven’t had for decades, perhaps since the last “America First” movement of the late ‘30s. And it is a debate that some foreign-policy experts suggest is long overdue, even if it tends to distress U.S. allies around the world. (“The unthinkable has come to pass,” Germany’s Die Welt wrote after Trump became the presumptive GOP nominee this week.)
It is also a debate that, were they still around to witness it, a majority of past U.S. presidents going back to George Washington would probably welcome—and most of them, believe it or not, might well take Trump’s side.
In his big foreign-policy rollout speech last week, Trump declared it was time “to shake the rust off of America’s foreign policy” and drop American pretensions about remaking the world in our image any longer. Or as he put it, in an obvious reference to the failed invasion of Iraq and intervention in Libya, America should abandon the “dangerous idea that we could make Western democracies out of countries that had no experience or interest in becoming a Western democracy.” Brazenly calling his agenda “America First”—never mind that was the name of the notorious pre-World War II isolationist movement—he also directly challenged the 70 years of bipartisan consensus over the post-World War II global order that America created. He suggested that the world needs America far more than the other way around, and he effectively warned U.S. allies that without a new global deal that demands a kind of tribute paid to Washington for its defense umbrella—he wants them to “prove” they are our friends, he says—he’d walk away from the world’s trade table, so to speak.
“We will no longer surrender this country or its people to the false song of globalism,” Trump said. “The nation-state remains the true foundation for happiness and harmony. I am skeptical of international unions that tie us up and bring America down.”
Predictably, Trump’s views have outraged commentators who lament the allusions to the prewar, anti-Semitism-laced isolationism of Charles Lindbergh and other members of the America First movement. His statements have also invited mockery from allies of Clinton, who as a pro-interventionist former secretary of state sees Trump’s turn away from the world as a naive and dangerous anachronism. Madeleine Albright, a mentor to Hillary on foreign policy and, as a refugee from Nazi Germany, a lifelong and passionate advocate of the idea that America is the “indispensable nation” in overseeing global order, accused Trump of historical illiteracy. “Maybe he never read history or he doesn’t understand it,” former Secretary of State Albright told reporters in a conference call organized by Clinton’s campaign…

So Trump may be an “id with hair,” as Hillary Clinton calls him, but at least when it comes to his foreign policy views, he’s an all-American id. His “America First” campaign theme has far deeper roots in the history of this country than most pundits are acknowledging. Indeed, Trump shouldn’t be dismissed as a mere apostate in his view of America’s role in the world; against the backdrop of all 239 years of America’s existence, he represents more a reversion to the American norm. Trump, in condemning one of the worst instances of American overreach in U.S. history, the Iraq invasion, declared in his speech: “The world must know we do not go abroad in search of enemies.” The line was an allusion to the famous injunction of John Quincy Adams in 1821 that America “does not go in search of monsters to destroy. She is the well-wisher to the freedom and independence of all. She is the champion and vindicator only of her own.” Adams went on to warn, somewhat presciently, America should know that “once enlisting under other banners than her own, were they even the banners of foreign independence, she would involve herself, beyond the power of extrication, in all the wars of interest and intrigue, of individual avarice, envy, and ambition, which assume the colors and usurp the standard of freedom. The fundamental maxims of her policy would insensibly change from liberty to force.”