Luke Ford

Comments at Steve Sailer:

* HRC had no advantage on any issue. No wonder she ran on personal attacks, and no wonder Bill threw his cell phone in frustration. Hillary did talk in handwavey gestures about Wall Street or some such but there was no substance.

* The sheer chutzpah of dopey Hillary going on about Trump’s temperament! And his fitness for the Presidency! Maybe this worked with some female voters but my bet is many/most of those polled as objecting to Trump’s character really did not. They were amused by Trump’s alpha brashness or ranked other “issues” ahead of it and too important to ignore. Like having a decent job and their family not getting raped by O-Care.

The bi-coastal elites and their opinion factories failed. The propaganda barrage from Hollywood celebs was relentless, I thought would turn too many lo-info voters away from The Donald.

* There is a segment on BBC after the election with Ann Coulter and Jerry Springer.

Springer can’t believe that so many Americans voted for Trump. How could they vote for someone so vulgar and ‘trashy’? Don’t these ordinary Americans have no taste?

But didn’t the likes of Springer degrade the American people over three decades with trash TV?

The Glob who created trashy TV shows made the public accept someone like Trump… especially after it acted like Bill Clinton’s indiscretions were a-okay as long as the stock market was up.

I recall TV shows like the Swan and Ugly Duckling and other garbage that the Lib Media foisted on the public.

Yet they wonder how the American Public got so coarse.

Such lack of self-reflection. Are these sociopaths?

—————–

Problem used to be Imperial Over-reach.

Now, the problem is Imperial Intake. West takes in too many people.

* Aside from already being rich and famous, his only real advantage may have been that otherwise he entered the race with few people ever thinking he could actually win. That meant that he ran his campaign from his heart, not his head. The result was that he showed us – or reminded us – that a candidate who runs from his heart can win. So many other presidential candidates are automatons who don’t say or do anything that isn’t focus-grouped and poll-tested. The most successful politicians all too often are sociopaths. Nothing they ever say can be believed. They run their campaigns and even live their lives based on what their pollsters tell them.

Mitt Romney was one of them. It’s assumed that Mitt Romney could have beaten Hillary Clinton this year, but could he have? Maybe, probably, but his margin of victory in the electoral college would probably have been smaller than Trump’s. Mitt Romney did everything you would have expected a robotic candidate to do. He ran to the right in the primaries, being by far the most pro-enforcement Republican candidate in the pack, then ran left (on cultural issues) in the general, completely dropping immigration from his campaign. Lots of people doubted his sincerity on immigration enforcement, and everything he’s said and done since losing has suggested he wasn’t.

On the other hand, what happens when you get a candidate with more of Romney’s personal strengths but with Trump’s willingness – courage – to run from the heart? You get all the states Trump won plus maybe quite a few more – New Hampshire (4), Minnesota (10), Virginia (13), Colorado (9), Nevada (6), and maybe even Oregon (7) and Maine (+3). That’s 358 electoral votes.

A Mitt Romney who runs more from his heart? Not only would that Mitt have thumped Hillary this year – he would’ve trounced Obama back in 2012.

Trump’s victory has done a lot to kill the Chamber of Commerce/Neocon arguments that appealing to the white Paleocon vote is a losing battle. It’s hard to imagine another Republican candidate ever running again who doesn’t understand that power. Republicans have emerged from the 2016 elections liberated to talk about the issues their voters have been demanding they address for years. Democrats, meanwhile, seem to be stuck in the same smug, anti-male, anti-white, anti-American rhetoric that sank Hillary Clinton’s campaign. Yes, the demographics are moving against the Republicans, but there stills appears to be time left to do something about it.

* Pence was all-in for Rubio’s Gang of 8 Amnesty Bill of 2013. He thought he would be welcome at a crappy Broadway hip-hop musical which has non-White actors playing the leading roles.

I’ll never forget walking through the East Harlem (Manhattan) neighborhood where my Italian parents were born. Two Puerto Rican women spat on me. An old Puerto Rican man called me a “Po-Po Republican that fucks goats.” The absolute hatred against The Unbearable Whiteness of Being was astonishing to witness. My parents had moved out of this neighborhood during the early fifties when a crime-wave, courtesy of Puerto Rican immigration, hit Manhattan (East Harlem was ground zero). They moved to Queens to get as close to Donald Trump’s parents as they possibly could!

During the next four years, the armed guard around Trump and Pence will, of necessity, be increased at least four-fold by the Secret Service.

* Remember that a Hamilton cast member is likely to be a twofer: minority and gay. You can’t imagine the entitlement he feels.

* The obverse of the point in the article that Trump won on the issues is that many voters who didn’t vote for him did so because of perceived weaknesses in his character or experience.

But he will certainly gain that experience on the job as President. And, as I certainly expect, he will allay fears about his riskiness as a President simply by being President for months and years without terrible disasters ensuing.

Once most Americans reach a comfort level with Trump as President, I’d expect his approval levels to rise. This is especially so given his implementation of policies with which they agree.

* I think you’re giving Romney too much credit. A few tweaks to his message and persona would not have made him a shoe-in then or now. There is an undefinable spark that makes one candidate appealing while another has Loser written all over him. Trump is the former while Romney is the latter As the saying goes nice guys finish last. When your opponents are hardcore fanatics bent on completing the transformation of America into a third world hellhole you need someone who’s willing to get their hands dirty.

* It was hard for Hillary to convincingly criticize Wall Street while standing on a pile of their money.

* Btw, the leftist glory-hound who lectured Pence called (in reply to Trump’s demand for an apology, which he didn’t get – this is why it was a waste of time to treat Hussein with respect) it a “conversation.”

Is there some way to explain to these idiots what a conversation is?