Links 11/11/16

Obituary: Leonard Cohen BBC

Norwegian, Russian to Square off in World Chess Championship ABC (furzy)

Fuel economy of American vehicles continues to drop TreeHugger. Cheap gas will do that.

Green loons pursue wowser apocalypse MacroBusiness

India rupees: Chaos at banks continues after ATMs reopen BBC

Moscovici: Trump’s US could be tax haven blacklisted EurActiv. The inclusion of Trump in the headline is clickbait. The tax haven issue is a possible issue regardless of who had won. But Moscovici’s remarks suggest that he’s gotten his information about Trump’s taxes by reading New York Times headlines.


Ukraine fears falling victim to Trump-Putin ‘grand bargain’ Financial Times

Russia Cools ‘Excessive Optimism’ on U.S. Relations Bloomberg


Syria Analysis: Obama Declares Fight is With “Terrorists” Rather Than Assad EA WorldView. Resilc: “We are fighting our own funded people?”

‘Crashing waves’ of jihadists fray soldiers’ nerves in Mosul battle Reuters (resilc)

Saudi Arabia: A Kingdom Coming Undone Defense One. Resilc: “This baby’s gonna blow.”

Trade Traitors

The Trans-Pacific Partnership is dead, Schumer tells labor leaders Washington Post (martha r)

Beijing plans rival Asia-Pacific trade deal after Trump victory Financial Times

Trump’s Drive to Redo Nafta Will Run Headlong Into Globalized Car Industry Wall Street Journal

People Burn New Balance Shoes After Company Praises Trump’s Trade Stance Bloomberg

Τhe Battle over CETA is far from over Defend Democracy


90-Minute Meeting Was a ‘Great Honor,’ Says President-Elect New York Times. Body language in other Obama-Trump pix not as awful as the one on the NYT front page, but the ones I’ve seen in the Michelle-Melania shots looked good, FWIW.

Trump presidency: Protests turn violent in Portland, Oregon BBC

More anti-Trump action planned after second night of protests across US Guardian. Have a look at the subhead: “Activists say they are weighing up their next moves, as hundreds of people take to the streets again following election of Donald Trump.” “Hundreds of people”?!? And this is the lead story at the US edition of the Guardian?

Chris Matthews on Trump Protests: What Kind Of Statement Is There To Make? They Lost RealClearPolitics

Acts of intimidation, violence and vandalism reported after Trump win Yahoo. Reports acts on both sides.

Ten-Step Program for Adjusting to President-Elect Trump New York Times. Actually not bad.

Donald Trump Ran on Protecting Social Security But Transition Team Includes Privatizers/ Intercept (martha r). Looks like the answer as to whether Trump was getting rolled by the Republican establishment is coming pretty quickly. Remember that Trump doesn’t owe Wall Street anything; this appears to be the result of turning to Republican “experts”.

List reveals Sarah Palin and Chris Christie as well as oil tycoons and bankers in Donald Trump’s possible cabinet Independent (martha r)

Trump Recruiting Among the Lobbyists He Once Denounced New York Times.

Donald Trump: JPMorgan’s Jamie Dimon Being Considered for Treasury Fortune (resilc). Wonder if Trump is running this trial balloon to make Elizabeth Warren see red and make Trump’s good buddy Carl Ichan look good by comparison.

Trump’s Transition Team Works to Form Cabinet Wall Street Journal. Story flogs Hensarling as a possible Treasury Secretary candidate (gah!) along with other scary ideas. But I tend to discount this because Hensarling is a buddy of Pence, and so far, Trump’s interactions with Pence have featured lots of friction. And Hensarling is plenty useful to Trump right where he is now. Let’s hope this reading proves to be correct.

U.S. consumer financial agency could be defanged under Trump Reuters

Trump Ascends to the Cherry Blossom Throne – Tyler Sic Semper Tyrannis (Kfathi). A contrary view to the links above, and today’s must read. Bear in mind that he exaggerates the role of Soros in US politics (Eastern Europe is a completely different kettle of fish). Too many other squillionaires throwing $ at candidates and think tanks. See his comment about John Bolton in particular (mind you I don’t see how anyone can think Bolton is a good idea), and his warning: “Instead, my friends on the Left, worry that he will not only do what he said he would, but he’ll go above and beyond, and the people will love him for it.” But this cheery reading discounts the difficulty Trump will have in securing the ability to govern. Saboteurs on what is nominally your side are a tougher obstacle than external opponents.

Blankfein Says Trump Infrastructure Commitment Good for Growth Bloomberg (resilc)

Before Taking the White House, Trump Due in Court over Fraud Vanity Fair. A President’s power of pardon is absolute save for impeachment, so Trump could pardon himself. But would he dare? And I’m not an expert on immigration law, but it’s hard to see how Trump is on shaky legal ground in deporting undocumented aliens. Other countries do it all the time. Try overstaying your visa and watch what happens if you get caught out.

Trump Shows Every Sign of Carrying Out Sweeping Immigration Crackdown Bloomberg. If Trump moves too fast on deportations, as opposed to policy changes (as in relying on loud noises, including warnings to employers, to induce many undocumented workers to leave of their own accord), Trump could precipitate sustained and serious protests. But the Feds may lack the staffing to increase deportations all that much near term.

Record Numbers of Undocumented Immigrants Being Detained in U.S. Bloomberg. Resilc: “Last I checked a demo has been in control since 2008.”

Trump bucks protocol on press access Associated Press. Lambert: “And where were they when Clinton didn’t hold a press conference for ~300 days?” Martha r:

When you go to the link, click on Attachment to download the pdf of the 9-page report.

from the bottom of page 6:

Based on group discussion, and debate exercises distributed prior to the debate.
By the Numbers
• Who won the debate: 27 to 2(or 3*) in favor of Sanders
• Who is more electable in November: 15 to 13 in favor of Sanders
• Who has a stronger message: 17 to 11 in favor of Sanders
• Who will win the South Carolina primary: 10 for Sanders, 9 for Clinton, and 11 unsure
• Who moved undecided voters: 14 lean Sanders, 2 lean Clinton, 14 remain undecided
*One of the HRC supporters was uncertain about her position post group.

The Polls Missed Trump. We Asked Pollsters Why. FiveThirtyEight. Resilc: “Because they are a con and mumbo jumbo?” Moi: Notice how Silver focuses on how “pollsters” missed to exculpate his own failings. As Keynes said:

A sound banker, alas, is not one who foresees danger and avoids it, but one who, when he is ruined, is ruined in a conventional way along with his fellows, so that no one can really blame him.

An App Saw Trump Winning Swing States When Polls Didn’t NPR (jawbone)

The 13 most amazing findings in the 2016 exit poll Washington Post

Former Democratic candidate said he will not rule out another presidential bid in 2020 Common Dream

Trumptastic Voyage The Simpsons

Give a look

Join Bernie Sanders and Support Keith Ellison for DNC Chair Bernie

The Democrats are leaderless. Slate. Resilc: “Bernie/Warren Crips vs Martha’s Vineyard Bloods. Crips better win.” Lambert and I saw Warren’s outreach to Trump via the media yesterday as moving into the power vacuum.

The whole Democratic Party is now a smoking pile of rubble Vox. Yes. Heck of a job, Matty. Not that you are solely responsible, but you and your ilk were all oozing self congratulation these past eight years.

Democrats Deserve President Trump For Creating A Cult Following Around Hillary And Cheating Bernie | The Huffington Post (furzy(

Democrats once represented the working class. Not any more Robert Reich, Guardian (martha r). A good summing up.

Trump, Empathy & Epistemic Closure American Conservative (resilc)

DNC Staffer Screams At Donna Brazile For Helping Elect Donald Trump Huffington Post (kj1313)

Donna Brazile: I’m sorry only that I got caught cheating with debate questions Salon. Resilc: “Until these Demo swine pay the GOP will win.”

5 countries Hillary Clinton supporters should move to The Duran (Chuck L)

Hillary Clinton’s Celebrity Feminism Was a Failure New Republic (Steve C)

US Cities Turn to Transportation Ballot Initiatives Wired (resilc)

Silicon Valley’s Call to Secede Shows How Out of Touch It Is MIT Technology Review (resilc). Instead of funding all those apps, maybe they should have thought about funding a ton of desalination plants and plowing over all of their vanity water-hogging vineyards.

KC council committee opposes Dakota Access pipeline Kansas City Star

Go figure the equity markets FT Alphaville

Fitch Drops Carlyle Group to BBB+ from A- PEU Report

Antidote du jour (Tracie H). A green tree python, from the Los Angeles Zoo:


See yesterday’s Links and Antidote du Jour here.

Print Friendly, PDF & Email


  1. stefan

    The election was very narrowly won (in fact Clinton won the popular vote) and the difference where it mattered (in western Pennsylvania and rural Wisconsin) was GUNS.

    Never underestimate 2nd Amendment rabies.

    In the township where I live (in the White Mountains of northern New Hampshire) there are 1,700 registered voters. On this election day, 140 new voters appeared out of the backwoods, scruffy in their camo gear, to register and vote (you can register and vote at the polls on election day in NH). Their issue was GUNS.

    In the rural areas where voter turnout was so strong, the motivating factor was GUNS. This was a “backwoods rebellion.”

    1. Cry Shop

      Everyone moans about the last straw and camel, when it was actually the 207,643,594 – 59,755,284 = 147,888,310 other straws that did nearly all the bending and breaking of the camel’s back.

    2. nothing but the truth

      the answer to the popular vote thing is to compare how much money and power structure support the candidates had.

      HRC had access to billions, and spent them. She also has had billions from peddling influence via the Clinton Foundation, and her “public private” initiatives. The media dared not publish a single comment against her.

      I think the bigger issue is the fracture between the coastal (ie, rent seeking, media-finance-union supported power structures), which basically manage the entire “money game” from laundering/asset bailout based NYC to sillyCON valley scammers, and “honest people” whose interests have been sold to the trade deals.

      The more power the govt acquires, the more corruption and patronising and influence peddling there will be. The solution is to have a transparent support net for the population, and reduce the govt power and meddling and intimidation (you need to live some time with an open mind in the blue Tri State to experience the democratic-union-govt intimidation machine).

      1. Roger Smith

        I think the bigger issue is the fracture between the coastal (ie, rent seeking, media-finance-union supported power structures), which basically manage the entire “money game” from laundering/asset bailout based NYC to sillyCON valley scammers, and “honest people” whose interests have been sold to the trade deals.

        This is it. And now people are mad and bemoaning what the Electoral College was literally designed to protect against, regional skewing. We witnessed a rare occurrence where the EC provided a power check to a overly power concentrated, clogged, unresponsive, and unrepresentative political establishment. The damage bled out just enough for the disaffected to effect the outcome.

        1. Oregoncharles

          I’m shocked to see defenses of the Electoral College on here, just because some happen to like the outcome. That’s hypocritical. The EC makes a liar out of any claim to be democratic (lower case d). Trump will be the 5th President who lost the popular vote. It’s nonsensical, a perfect example of a written-in botch. It’s a poisonous legacy from when states had to be convinced to join the Union.

          The problem isn’t only that it isn’t democratic; it’s that you have legal power without moral legitimacy. That afflicted Bill Clinton (who got only 42%, albeit a plurality) and would have dragged down Bush II’s presidency if not for 9/11. It’s a recipe for trouble, like the riots now occurring and likely to continue around the country. The inaugural should be really fun.

          There is actually a fix available that does NOT require a constitutional amendment, based on the states’ control of their electoral votes. A number of state legislatures have promised to deliver their electoral votes to the winner of the popular vote, effective as soon as enough have signed on to control the election. They’re fairly close. Wish I had a link to hand, but it’s a national movement – I think Oregon passed it a year or two ago.

      2. Carolinian

        Excellent comment. The Dems need to drop the dog ate my homework excuses. Just as in 2000– when their candidate couldn’t even win his own state–their candidate was the problem and the party that put him/her there. The Republicans are only strong because “you can’t beat something with nothing.”

          1. temporal

            On December 19, the Electors of the Electoral College will cast their ballots. If they all vote the way their states voted, Donald Trump will win. However, they can vote for Hillary Clinton if they choose. Even in states where that is not allowed, their vote would still be counted, they would simply pay a small fine – which we can be sure Clinton supporters will be glad to pay!

            Our Team has the money and the resources. Give us a call, we’ll have lunch and pick up the tab.

            If they could pull this off they definitely wouldn’t enjoy the consequences. The survivalist dudes, and there are plenty of them in every state in the Union, would finally have their dreams come true.

            1. WJ

              Isn’t this akin to Bernie Sanders’s pledge to make the case to DNC Superdelegates directly? Wasn’t he pilloried for this?

              1. nippersmom

                Not at all the same. Many superdelegates “pledged” their votes prior to the primaries/caucuses in their states even being held. Many were not tied to a particular state. And most important of all, superdelegates are a function of the Democratic party bylaws; the electoral college is established by the Constitution.

                1. MyLessThanPrimeBeef

                  Somewhat similar, it seems to me.

                  The rules of the primaries/caucuses are based on party bylaws.

                  The rules of the general election are based on the Constitution.

                  Unfortunately, there is nothing about when, the time, a super-delegate can pledge his/her vote.

                  What is also similar is the ‘never give up’ fighting spirit, even when it’s hopeless, with or without cause.

                  And what is without cause is the never-heard-of-before argument that one candidate can’t clinch, before the convention, without 51% of (pledged delegates plus super-delegates), while – this is reality – he or he can only get pledged delegates – and with the argument of super delegates not pledging until convention – and not super-delegates before the convention. In fact, to clinch before the convention, a candidate – depending on the ratio of super-delegates to the total delegates – must get over 60% of pledges delegates.

          2. RabidGandhi

            And if the Brexit parallel holds, we should be bracing ourselves for a nauseating bevy of “Voters Regret Voting Trump” think-pieces from the Nostradomuses in the MSM.

            I’m doubling my non-subscription to The New Republic just in case.

          3. MyLessThanPrimeBeef

            2 million out of her 60 million votes.

            Talk about the tyranny of minor minority.

            Do those 2 million supporters count more than the other 58 million Hillary voters (not to mention Trump’s voters) who have not signed?

            And is this a 2nd election, if we start counting the number of people signing – 60 millions for and 60 millions against?

            1. Jagger

              They are the young. They don’t yet have the experience and judgment to realize what messages are just emotional BS manipulation and what messages are based on a realistic assessment of the facts. Once stirred up, it takes awhile to regain emotional equilibrium.

          4. Optimader

            Touched in Lambert’s WC yesterday ( make that commented on in Lambert’s Water Cooler).

            The CD herd all apparently laid their heads on the desk and napped during American History and Civics Classes.

            In the final draft of the FFathers paperwork, what they formed was a Republic. You can never be sure about alternative realities, but If the US were a pure Democracy it might well be the case alot of thrm wouldnt have to be concerned about voting re: Emancipation Proclamation and Women’s Sufferage

            1. Elizabeth Burton

              The CD herd all apparently laid their heads on the desk and napped during American History and Civics Classes.

              What makes you think anyone under the age of 35 has even had civics classes? When the privatization of education (AKA “reform”) movement became chapter and verse for both parties, civics classes were one of the earliest sacrifices to the necessity of passing standardized tests. As for American history, textbooks sucked even when I was in high school fifty years ago, all slanted to pound in the belief in American exceptionalism; and I think it’s safe to say that slowly became even worse as those same reformers with their billionaire backers and the corporate/financial sector willing and eager to cash in turned education into preparing young people to be obedient workers and consumers who won’t question authority.

              Those of us who do understand have a responsibility to get off our duffs and actively work to provide the younger voters with the information and knowledge they desperately need to achieve the changes they so desperately want. If all we do is look down our noses and pontificate, it will be our own fault when Ragnarok comes.

              1. MyLessThanPrimeBeef

                Not just obedient workers, but good at math.

                Those billionaires want good tech students so good American tech students can face off against good Indian and Chinese tech students. With more good tech students globally, the price for good tech students should be cheaper.

                And if Japanese mothers want their kids to study 16 hours a day, we will have respond in kind, so we can race to the competitive bottom.

                “Oh, my god, our students score low again in science!!!”

            2. NotTimothyGeithner

              They also had the 3/5 compromise and slavery. I prefer indirect elections to the Senate if we can’t abolish it. The Founders had two over riding concerns: unity (hey knew how different the South was) and in many ways they had strong Democratic direct traditions in parts of the country. We are living in a very different age after Lincoln, Wilson, and FDR were given real power.

              My dad was a lower middle class If his dad was working Irish Pole from Boston, but when he was in college, he was on the T one day and he turns his head and sees Senator Henry Cabot Lodge Jr. These people were so patrician the line went (help) “the Cabots only speak to the Lodges, and the Lodges only speak to God.” Boston Brahmin. He was taking the train. He had a self driving car, a chauffeur. Sanders was mocked for walking to work by the modern elite, and he’s just some Jewish kid from Brooklyn, not a blue blood. We need to bring back direct democracy. We don’t call these people WASPs anymore because we don’t even see them behind encourages.

              Besides, language changes. “The thing of the people” and the “people’s thing.” Which one is a Republic and a Democracy?

          5. Baby Gerald

            Isn’t it funny how everyone got all riled up when Trump deflected the question about accepting the election results once they were tallied?

            Now the tally is over and the losers think they get to change the rules. Everyone loves the electoral college when it works for them, hates it when it doesn’t.

            1. MyLessThanPrimeBeef

              I think if there is some evidence of election rigging that would reverse the result, it’d be justified to protest.

              Trump would not be contradictory (such a case – the other side of your comment – will be made by the protesters) to argue against those protesting Hillary supporters, because there is no such evidence so far.

              1. Ché Pasa

                What makes you think the growing protests are “Hillary supporters”?

                Some probably are, but it looks to me like most of them are in the “none of the above” camp, the disheartened and disenfranchised who wanted neither of these people in the Presidency and refuse to accept the outcome.

                In the meantime, I’m betting there will never be any evidence of rigging — well, maybe in a hundred years when things have settled down — because no one dares to look into it for fear of what they’ll find.

                1. MyLessThanPrimeBeef

                  They don’t have to be Hillary supporters, and probably not all of them, as you say.

                  The argument that Trump is not being contradictory still stands, unless there is evidence of rigging.

                  And there may be, if someone will come forth with it.

                  1. Ché Pasa

                    That’s the trick, isn’t it? The political class and their sponsors, owners, and media servants have decided that an unverifiable outcome is “good enough” for them and that We, the Rabble are to accept it without question.

                    All of Trump’s hooey about a rigged election is now inoperative because he won, and all of Clinton’s yapping about Putin’s interference is just so much nonsense, right?

                    Yet both of them insisted that something wasn’t right about the electoral process before the outcome was announced, and now… not a peep.

                    Well, maybe something wasn’t right.

                    It really does depend on whose ox is getting gored, of course, and in this case, the ox is that of the people.

            2. Ché Pasa

              Isn’t it funny that both major candidates made a huge stink about the election being interfered with — by shadowy Hillary forces or by Putin the Devil — and that as soon as Trump secured the Electoral College majority (though the Electors can vote for anyone) the “interference” meme was totally forgotten in the interests of “unity” and “healing.”

              Well we went through that with Bush 2, and the result was an almost unparalleled horror show of death, destruction, economic collapse and dislocation.

              This time, I don’t think it’ll be quite so kumbaya. Even as the media and the Dems are saying “don’t fight it,” and Obama vows to collaborate with Trump to crush any rebellion.

      3. Plenue

        That’s the thing. Trump was doing everything ‘wrong’: he wasn’t running many ads, he didn’t have much on the ground campaign infrastructure, the GOP refused to significantly support him, and he didn’t put in any of his own money. For all the problems and inefficiencies it’s now becoming apparent the Clinton campaign had, it still has all the structures a ‘proper’ campaign is supposed to have. And in the end it was steamrolled by the electoral vote and only won the popular vote by 150,000. Trump essentially won with at least one hand tied behind his back. He was tapping into a cultural and economic zeitgeist. Had he taken this campaign even 10% more seriously than he did he would have easily made up that 150,000 votes. Even without winning the popular vote this was still a total referendum on the ruling elite and the status quo.

    3. KurtisMayfield

      Can we please put this idea that the Republican voters turned out in droves to bed?

      If you compare the numbers of 2016 to 2008, there is not much change in the Republican numbers. There was a dropoff in Democratic numbers. This is why HRC lost.

        1. MyLessThanPrimeBeef

          Hillary lost, more than Trump won.

          Thus again media distortion.

          Acts of intimidation, violence and vandalism after Hillary loss.

          Instead, we get (with acts by both sides)

          Acts of intimidation, violence and vandalism after Trump win.

          1. OpenThePodBayDoorsHAL

            Thank you. For people like Stefan above (who thinks it was 20,000 gun supporters in PA that made the difference I’d say:

            “It’s broad, wet, starts in Tanzania and ends in Egypt: Da Nile”

            Something like 60% of Trump voters said on exit they did not vote for Trump but against Hilary.

            Here’s the silver lining: Trump policies will be repugnant, and they will clearly have the stamp “Republican” on them, so we can finally get back to opposing all of the horrible sh*t that Bush Term 3 and 4 brought us.

            (For the record I think Trump will reduce foreign war and tension, and he already killed the TPP which is a helluvan improvement over his predecessor. If he audits the Fed, stops funding ISIS, and follows through on his lobbying reform I just might become a fan).

      1. oho

        “There was a dropoff in Democratic numbers.”

        Meaning: are you better off now than 8 years ago? = no for many people.

        1. MyLessThanPrimeBeef

          I suspect some Romney supporters were too hard core to ever want to vote for Trump.

          Maybe Romney urged them not to. And the media helped with spreading Romney’s message.

      2. RabidGandhi

        Yes. Look at Detroit. If HRC wins Motown, she takes Michigan, but for some odd reason (/sarc) her AA firewall didn’t show up for her. I suspect the same could be said for Philly and PA.

        Who woulda thunk that the formula Voter Suppression + Big Finance ≠ White House?

        But don’t expect Team Blue to learn from this. Dems 2020: “Perhaps if we build a large wooden badger…”

        1. Bettis

          I feel the need to correct some misrepresentations about Michigan and Detroit. The media is reporting that Hillary had a 100k+ reduction in votes (as compared to Obama) in Wayne county and that it is due to reduced AA turnout in Detroit. But Wayne county is large and diverse, and has substantial pockets of AA, Asian-American, White, and Hispanic populations. There is a larger amount of class-based thinking in this area, and based on what I have seen “on the ground” (so-to-speak), the reduced turnout was due to normally reliable Democratic blue collar voters deciding to not vote. People liked that Trump gave voice to economic and trade issues, but they did not believe a word of what he was saying. No one trusted Hillary because of her many scandals, her closeness to big banks, and poor record of judgement.

          1. Patricia

            And also a very large Arab-American population, many of whom went all-out for Sanders. Same thing about trust re candidates on offer.

          1. polecat

            “What .. is your favorite Color ….. ??”

            “Ah … red .. no green …. no, wait … it’s BLUE !” ……”AHHEEEEEEEEE “

      3. arte

        I wonder if one reason for the Democrat numbers dropoff wasn’t Reagan-era cold war children getting triggered by the continual war drum rhetoric about the Russians. For me, that got to almost Dr Strangelove levels of weirdness during the last weeks of the campaign.

        Nobody seems to be talking about Clinton campaign belligerence in the aftermath, so this is just a personal anecdote, but I had an almost immediate (irrational, visceral) feeling of relief after waking up and finding out Trump was winning. “At least there will be no nuclear war”.

        1. goingnowhereslowly

          Totally agree! I had been saying for months–and getting VERY strange looks–that electing Clinton meant war with Russia that had a very high probability of going nuclear. My gut sense of relief as the results came in was immense. I was almost giddy.

          When I ran into a good friend at work on Wednesday–she was stunned and horrified–I said that at least her daughter would get to grow up. Things would suck, but she would be alive.

    4. MtnLife

      Can you ammophopbics just go back to the city if you can’t live around guns in an area with a nearly non-existent murder rate? You don’t live in Chicago. Quit trying to gentrify the countryside. Bernie learned his lesson on this early. Too bad the rest of the hardcore liberals can’t. I am a, and know a lot of, libertarian socialist(s). We are fully on board for helping the disadvantaged but DON’T touch the guns. Many of the poor use them to put food on the table and you are expected to provide a modicum of your own defense that far out.

      1. DJG

        MtnLife: There is a difference between a long gun and a handgun. So long as the 2d amendment types insist that everything is a-okay with the proliferation of handguns, there will be problems. No one wants to take away hunting rifles. That is a canard invented by the NRA.

        And tell me about all of your poor friends who use handguns during the deer season, please. And duck season–even better.

        1. JTMcPhee

          Actually, deer hunting with handguns, including one’s very own personal concealed-carry “Glock” or Beretta or S&W etc. preference, is a thing. Search on the term for proof. Here is one fun selection from the particularized media:

          And during a recent Doorbuster Sales Event in the pre-election week, my Local Gun Store, Shoot Straight LLC, was flooded with people all lathered to get their Fisher-Price ARs, and sniper rifles (long guns with .308 chambering and big old Leupold scopes and camouflage finish) and of course all kinds of handguns.

          As to behaviors in the “flyover,” I do have stories, and reminiscences from readings about how the gun actually won the West — most of the epic killings were of course ambushes and back-shootings (our forbears were as canny as the hated “Taliban” and “Terraists,” who also prefer to kill, not be killed) — not the mano-a-mano “High Noon” fantasies… Lower population density is helpful, but what happens in bars and road houses, in Desperation Land, on a Friday or Saturday night?

        2. m_m

          Amen. I can’t believe anyone on this site has the stones to claim that there should be no gun regulations. Especially because – SERIOUSLY? – poor people need them to provide food? I live in the country. We hunt. We eat what we hunt. Now explain to me what this has to do with allowing people to buy semi-automatic weapons. How about those armor-piercing bullets? Those sure are useful to get a pheasant.

          1. Yves Smith Post author


            I’m a fan of gun control but this argument is really lame and proves the gunz fans point.

            1. The Dem focus on semi-automatic weapons is virtue signaling and will do nada in terms of reducing gun ownership. The people who are a danger to themselves and others are the ones with a revolver in their bedside table drawer.

            2. You can bet even if we were to get more stringent gun laws, cops and ex military types would be able to get more powerful weapons. And a lot of ex military types are not exactly stable thanks to PTSD. Plus I recall that one of the recent mass shooters had licensed weapons.

            3. See this:

            So any ammunition that meets those construction requirements and can be fired from a handgun is legally considered armor piercing. It is legal to buy and possess armor piercing ammunition, but it is illegal to sell armor piercing ammunition. That means you can have it, but nobody can sell it to you.

            Now the more interesting question is, what do you do if you want ammunition which can pierce armor, but isn’t legally armor piercing?

            First of all you can buy a rifle. Bullets of almost every type will penetrate soft body armor when projectile impact velocity exceeds about 2000-2100 feet per second. Such velocities are common for nearly every non-rimfire and non-pistol caliber rifle. 1/4 inch thick steel plate armor can be penetrated by bullets with an impact velocity of approximately 3100-3200 feet per second. Ceramic based plate armor fares a bit better and is much harder to penetrate, specifically tailored bullets are needed. Fortunately ceramic plate armor isn’t particularly common outside of the military and very specific segments of law enforcement. So rifles are generally the go to solution for penetrating body armor.

            1. Optimader

              Yes on the revolver thing. Actually a semiauto is much less reliable than a revolver, so there is that.. maybe semiautos shouldnt be banned and revolvers should?

              Large enough cartridge and you can figure on it being “armour piercing. The deer hunter can shoot a .30-06 through armor, conctrete walls trees ect. F=MA

        3. Praedor

          Handguns ARE used widely in hunting. In particular, they are used for putting an animal out of its misery if the rifle shot didn’t kill it.

          I’m no hunter, do not kill or like to kill things but I have an “assault” rifle and a handgun and I will not be giving them up. Ever. So lose the idea that you can ban MY tools just because YOU are not comfortable.

          Why do I have them? Because I ENJOY SHOOTING THEM. I have them because I WANT them. That’s ALL that matters.

          I’m retired military. I am 100% comfortable with and around firearms. You NOT being is your own personal problem and has nothing to do with me and those like me. I wont force you to own or handle firearms and you don’t try and force me to NOT to.

          On the bright side, I am hopeful that FINALLY the Hearing Protection Act will be passed. The Hearing Protection Act will simply make silencers as easy to get as they are in Europe, that hell-hole of assassins and gun violence because SILENCERS. It WILL pass unless it is merely a tool for fundraising by GOPtards the way “GOP obstruction” is merely a tool for Democrap fundraising.

          1. JTMcPhee

            , I’m hoping there will soon be a Citizens Rights Equalizer Protection Act that will let me stock up on guided and ballistic antitank weapons, so I and my family have a chance against our local militarized police who have quite a number of “Buffalo” mine-resistant vehicles, for some reason or other…

            I have and use guns, long and hand, but have to offer that silencers are not really about hearing protection… but they are really cool! You can shoot somebody, and with a little care, nobody will be able to figure out where the round came from! so like the Rich People who are screwing the rest of us over, we mopes can have power, with impunity, over life and death…

            1. Praedor

              That’s why they’re legal in Europe (and ENCOURAGED) because:
              1) Europe has a massive assassin problem!
              2) Europe is CRAZY and totally Mad Max!

              Silencers are considered polite. They prevent disturbing the neighbors, they prevent disturbing wildlife. They protect hearing, making firing a weapon much friendlier.

              But you know Europe. Fucking nutbags! You can buy silencers OVER THE COUNTER for Cthulhu’s sake!

              1. RMO

                Silencers are legally available in the U.S., you just need to pay a little to the government when you want to get one. They are only really silent with subsonic projectiles fired from closed breech firearms – no revolvers, .45ACP is fine but 9mm requires reduced velocity cartridges etc. They are frequently built into the design of airguns from Europe and the U.S.

                The notion that hunting firearms are the only ones that should be allowed to be privately owned in the U.S. will probably never fly. Self defense is pretty widely seen as a legitimate reason for owning one and I don’t see that changing soon. For what it’s worth I live in Canada, I like target shooting (though I only personally own a couple of target air rifles) and fully support our firearms laws and the fact that here the law doesn’t accept self defense as the primary reason for owning firearms. There is a clause saying that certain people in exceptional circumstances can be given dispensation to carry a gun for this reason but I don’t actually know of any cases where that’s been granted. We can own handguns in Canada, we can buy semi-automatic “assault rifles” here and, if you already owned one back in early 90’s you can still buy fully automatic weapons here too.

      2. cocomaan

        This can’t be said enough. The extreme gun violence, absent terroristic attacks like the Pulse nightclub or school shootings, is almost entirely an inner city phenomenon. And that inner city phenomenon of extreme violence, I’d argue, is almost entirely fueled by the drug war, a one hundred year battle against substances that clearly isn’t working. Brain drain then finishes off those communities.

        Plus, the idea that the election was thrown by rednecks like myself is just silly. Turnout was the bigger mover in this election.

        1. Praedor

          Yes, the Drug War ™ but also neoliberalism and the devastation it leaves in its wake. People are commodities under neoliberalism, to be traded and left to live or die by the Holy of Holies: markets. Thge commoditization and rape of working people, the neoliberal dehumanization of its victims, is also largely a driver of actual gun violence. Desperation and anger tends to breed violence.

          1. JSM

            Yup. Personal opinion on has changed on guns, no so much for one reason or another but because they’re a smokescreen for systemic problems that will never be dealt with by hysterics in the wake of tragic violence – as if they ever could be. The end of the line was the farcical Democratic sit-in this year. Where’s the sit-in for economic justice?

        2. beth

          I can’t speak for anyone else, but during my childhood in the 50s & 60s, I knew of 3 gun incidents and I grew up in a hunter family in the city. One was an accident, among the hunting party itself with two doctors present, and still the man died. One was a high school boy, probably gay, hanging out at the local bus station during the night. The last was my 4 yo brother finding a fully loaded handgun in the glove compartment of my dad’s friend’s car and then pointing at me w/i 6-8 inches from my face.

          My dad’s guns were always kept at his office unless in his trunk on the way to a hunt. I never knew my dad to get excited about guns in and of themselves. It was the fun of walking through the woods with friends and bringing home meat that was delicious.

      3. oho

        Venison, pheasant, ducks = free-range, low carbon footprint, ‘green’ meat. But you won’t hear that on CNN.

        re. handguns === 911 is far away in the country. drugs, tweaked-drunk addicts don’t just hang out in the cities.

        1. Praedor

          I hear gunfire all the time. Sometimes its rapid fire popping (signifying someone blowing through a handgun magazine) while other times its a slow BOOM or a rapid fire boom boom boom signifying hunting rifle or assault rifle, respectively. SOMETIMES the gunfire comes from across the road! Or just down the road from me! OR EVEN FROM MY BACKYARD!

          Oh wait. I’m in the country and all that shooting is background noise signifying nothing. Someone out hunting OR target shooting in their back 40. Like me. I keep it to a minimum on my own property, however, because my horses, dogs, and chickens don’t care for it (though they don’t mind it when I use a silencer…SUCH a pleasant experience, using a silencer).

          1. Jeotsu

            Used to live in South Chicago during the peak crack years (late 80’s). I would hear at least one gun battle each night before I fell asleep. A friend down the hall had a stray .38 come through a window one day. Life in the big city…

            In Philly we had a flat mate who grew up in Germantown (which we visited to see his mother, and wow what a blighted place). He commented at one point that of all his friends when he was a 12 year old (circa 1984) were now either dead or in jail, he was the only survivor of his cohort.

            It’s hard to understate the impact US policies of the 20th century have had on the cities, and particularly the african american parts.

        2. jgordon

          The elite intelligista are all cosmopolitan city dwellers. And while they don’t understand the issues that rural people face they sure know how to fix all their problems and make them safe. That’s just how great they are.

      4. EndOfTheWorld

        Right, HRC in her infinite stupidity tried to run against Bernie on the grounds he was not enough of a gun-grabber. Guns are not going away in the US. Get used to it. It’s true that one of the many reasons people voted against HRC is she’s a devout gun-grabber. But there were other issues: she’s a criminal who should be in prison, for example.

        The election is over. President Trump will take office. If anybody is seriously accusing the Republicans of voter suppression or other infractions, then by all means pursue your complaints through the proper channels (law suits, etc.) Anything else is just sore loser grumbling.

        1. polecat

          I would like to add that not only is H. Clinton a criminal, but SHE probably had/has the advantage of having a 24/7 security detail …

          ….. But hey ….. Us plebes in the outer districts are deemed ‘unworthy & deplorable’ ….

        2. Arizona Slim

          As Bernie said many times, he’s from a rural state. A lot of gun owners in VT.

          Here’s another thing about VT: It is a poor state. Think Appalachia along the Canadian border and you have the idea.

          Which means that more than a few of those guns are used for hunting. And those hunters aren’t out there for a fun weekend in the woods. They’re hunting for food.

          1. EndOfTheWorld

            In a lot of rural areas there are few policemen patrolling a large area. So why don’t the criminals pour out of the cities to rob some country homes, which are often unlocked? Because the criminals know the people living in the houses have loaded guns and all of their neighbors do too. And the cops are glad we’re all armed. We are happy to help them defend the area.

            The other day I asked an old timer what the annual murder rate is in our county. The answer: “About a half.”

      5. Lee

        While I live in a coastal metropolitan are, I have spent a lot of time in rural Montana. Gun ownership is almost universal and open carry is common. Getting one’s annual elk is a significant nutritional element in the diets of very many folks who live in those environs.

      6. temporal

        In NY state, certainly a handgun awkward state, you can purchase a 50 cal, even with the much maligned SAFE Act in place, but sadly, perhaps, not the fancy armor piercing bullets. The regular kinds of bullets are OK though. I have no idea what a person might hunt with these things. Perhaps brick houses or big trees. As for hunting deer, around here the trick is avoid hitting them as you drive down the road. These suckers are everywhere.

        A couple of my friends have handgun permits but I don’t see much point in having a handgun.

        1. Praedor

          50 cals are primarily a competition weapon for civilians. Or some just get a kick out of the BIG BOOM that it makes. You don’t need armor piercing bullets with .50 cal, any of its bullets will pretty much blow through most basic armor.

          In the military, if not a machine gun, the .50 cal rifle CAN be used as a sniper rifle (makes a right mess of the person you hit…blows them to pieces) but is most often used as an anti-materiel rifle (remote destruction of bombs/suspected IEDs, etc).

          Even the most basic civilian version is pretty damn pricey. I would far rather spend that money on OTHER firearms than a .50. A BIG BOOM just doesn’t rock my boat.

      7. Waldenpond

        In CA they just voted for background checks…. on ammunition. Assault weapons, large magazines? Ok, that I could see. That would seem to apply to hobbyists and wouldn’t be burdensome. But, I didn’t vote for it (for multiple reasons) because I couldn’t determine if it had language that excluded to hunters. It passed.

        Note: if you support broad transfer payments (kept low) such as single payer, universal income or job guarantee, you are a libertarian socialist. If you support a hierarchy of needy, and prefer to keep payments low, you might be a libertarian liberal.

    5. NotTimothyGeithner

      So why the poor black and Hispanic turnout? 7 million missing voters also omits growth in the electorate. It’s closer to 10 million missing voters. Where were they? Was it guns? Was it a candidate too terrible to even be considered fit for a sacrificial lamb?

      Let’s not forget, Hillary lost to Donald Trump, not the second coming of Raygun. The problem wasn’t just GUNS.

        1. Skip Intro

          In other words, nothing to do with guns, despite the first post’s unsupported assertion to the contrary. It wouldn’t surprise me if the NRA saw this as an opportunity to further intimidate democrats against mentioning gun control.

        2. KurtisMayfield

          When you promise the voter “more of the same”, and they don’t like that, then they won’t vote for you.

          Obama promised “Hope and Change”, and delivered on a Health Care plan that looked similar to the one the Heritage Foundation was touting as an alternative to Hillary’s plan 20 years ago. He then gave the biggest tax cut in US history on the back of SSI funding, never closed Gitmo, and got us more involved in misadventures in the Middle East. He also was negotiating with the Legislature to cut SSI, until the Tea Party stopped it.

          Then HRC gave the people “more of the same”, and they thought it would work because “demographics”. They threw away the 18-34 vote by Bernie bashing, and she delivered nothing to vote for but “Not-Trump”. And they wonder why no one showed up.

          1. RMO

            “they thought it would work because “demographics”” I heard a lot about the inevitable demographic driven triumph of the Democratic party. Much of it focused on how the younger generations are more progressive and that this would mean unstoppable growth of the Dem party. Then, the DNC and their media pets spent the primary season spitting in the faces of these progressive young people because they supported Bernie. They called them misogynistic, racist, ignorant and naive, smearing them in all sorts of ways. Once they got their preferred candidate installed as the nominee did they do anything at all to reach out to them? No, they gloated over them, called them Russian dupes and tried to appeal to Republicans.

      1. Pat

        And I’ll bet it wasn’t just black and Hispanic turnout, although those will be by far the largest groups represented in that number.

        Economics will have a lot to do with, aka class. Let me repeat and add to oho’s comment above:

        Meaning: are you better off now than 8 years ago? = no for many people. Are you even as well off as you were nine years ago? is also a no for a significant portion of people.

        1. NotTimothyGeithner

          Hillary fanatics are desperate for someone to blame other than themselves because support of Hillary in the primary for her average supporter was quite simply a failure to be an informed citizen, the ultimate failure as a citizen.

          1. RabidGandhi

            If you look at the Camp Clinton campaign strategy, it was basically two pronged:

            1. Trump is Hitler-Putin-BillBuckner-Antichrist
            2. Hillary did what? We can explain that…

            I.e., they gave 0 positive reasons for people to schlep out and vote (because there are 0 positive reasons to vote HRC). This is consistent with their MO from the outset: no need to seek votes from anyone donating under $2700. Trump on the other hand has very high unfavourables, but he was able to motivate some people to go to the polls, and given that his opponent was concentrated more on vote suppression than GOTV, he won.

            1. phred

              As a Red Sox fan, I cannot thank you enough for including BillB in that list ; ) You just made my whole day : ) That said, Buckner was unfairly vilified and I sincerely hope that he looks back on his fine career with pride.

            2. PlutoniumKun

              I think the biggest weakness of Camp Clintons public message campaign was how easily they were goaded into responding to Trump. It seemed to me that the initial message was the right one – i.e. ‘Hilary may be boring and a bit dodgy, but she’s a safe pair of hands’. They should have allowed surrogates to do the attack dog thing.

              But I think the Dems were so obsessed with being on the front foot that they simply couldn’t resist attacking Trump, and as the saying goes ‘wrestle with a pig…’ The more they raised public disgust, the more they were tarred with the same brush as Trump. They couldn’t even achieve the basic competence of any political campaign, which is to pick a message carefully and stick with it consistently.

              Among other reasons Sanders would have won easily against Trump is that he proved against Hilary the benefits of sticking consistently to your own message, and not attacking your opponent without good reason. Sanders would never have been so stupid as to get involved in verbal warfare with Trump.

              1. RabidGandhi

                It’s by no means gospel, but the Politico article disagrees with your point about HRC’s “safe pair of hands”:

                “Make a virtue of her longevity,” Palmieri advised in an email that month to Podesta, released by WikiLeaks. “Embrace all the Clinton-ness — the forty years in politics, the decades on the national stage…Maybe folks had Clinton fatigue at one point, now they are just seen as part of the fabric of America. (Hillary won’t go away, she is indefatigable, she just keeps at it, and you can trust her to get the job done.)”

                But in a change election, pitching longevity and experience as a positive simply didn’t add up to a resonant message.

                “Embrace all the Clinton-ness” (note: not the Onion.)

              2. MyLessThanPrimeBeef

                Also in the basic competence of any campaign is to reach out to your voters.

                Many have commented here that they had never been contacted.

            3. MyLessThanPrimeBeef

              If the other guy is a monster, your life is easier – you can be just a little less terrifying, and you are the better choice (this is, if you could convince the voters that).

        2. Katniss Everdeen

          Interesting, or not, that during a nearly 2-year-long campaign, that “better off” question was never asked. What with obama being so “popular” and all.

          1. oho

            ” that “better off” question was never asked”

            Cuz Team DNC knows what the answer would be for the bottom 80% of all Americans.. keep push that 4.9% headline unemployment (U-3 right?)

          2. Lois

            The think I keep being amazed by is that more people aren’t including OBAMA as being someone at fault for this outcome. He sold hope and change and then just went with the establishment on everything and broke almost all of his promises. And a lot of people are worse off now. But I still see people saying how much they will miss him, how great he’s been, etc.! But selling more of his style blew up in their faces!

        3. Arizona Slim

          I’ve been a full-time freelancer since 1994. During that time, we’ve had three presidents.

          Hate to do it, but I’m gonna drop a truth bomb:

          My little itty-bitty freelancing business had its best years under George W. Bush. The Clinton and Obama years didn’t even come close.

          And, no I didn’t vote for Bush. No way. I opposed him for every minute that he was in office.

          Obama? I was done with him after he threw the public option under the bus. That was in 2009.

          In the subsequent seven years of struggling to stay afloat, I saw no reason why the Democrats deserved my support. Yeah, I voted for Obama over Romney in 2012, but by this year, the siren song of the Ds no longer resonated with me. I voted for Bernie in Arizona’s stolen primary and Jill Stein for POTUS. I have no regrets.

          Although I didn’t vote for Trump, I can understand why so many people did. You can’t push people down for so long without there being some sort of reaction.

      2. Andrew Watts

        Nobody has bothered to point out the exact moment when Hillary lost the election in their analysis. It was her speech that involved then condemnation of deplorables. You shouldn’t alienate millions of potential voters or supporters by displaying contempt for them in public. Especially when the working class is constantly bombarded by the maliciousness of middle class snobbery.

        I saw this firsthand when one of my friends, who voted for Clinton in the primaries, instantly turned against Hillary after that speech. Saying in effect, “White liberals might not call us n—–s but they don’t mind treating us like’em”. I’m pretty sure he voted for Trump. He wasn’t displeased with the election outcome at all.

        This isn’t an abnormality in American history. The historic comparison to this epic blunder in US election history was when Woodrow Wilson chose to persecute the anti-war Left and German-Americans during the first World War. By doing this he condemned the country to Republican control until the Great Depression.

        What the hell is a matter with liberals?

        1. NotTimothyGeithner

          “Liberals” or “Democrats”? Bear with me, but Bill is a Southern Democrat. The plantation class looked down on poor, rural whites too under Jim Crow. Except for a few house slaves, are the Democrats really that different from the old Southern Democrats? They’ll con bourgeois types outside of the South into putting deplorable in their place as long as they are unseen “others.” Jim Crow was tolerated because it couldn’t be seen outside the South.

          1. Andrew Watts

            “Liberals” or “Democrats”?

            Good question, and I can only say I think it’s both. I don’t want to recount the stories of what happened when Obama was elected. Just imagine what a bunch of congratulatory and self-righteous white bourgeoisie liberals would do when you’re the only non-white person in range. Condescending or patronizing isn’t the word I’d use.

            Bear with me, but Bill is a Southern Democrat.

            So was Wilson in both fact and temperament plus the mood altering health problems. It’s a reason why I made the comparison.

            are the Democrats really that different from the old Southern Democrats?

            Another good question that I can’t be certain of the answer.

            I hesitate to say that liberals/progressives have certain misconceptions and bias about ethnic minorities but there are millions of non-white voters missing in this election and Trump scored more votes among them than Romney. It’s hard not to generalize about this topic which is why I resorted to a personal anecdote.

            I’m glad you see that deplorable is just another word for proletariat. Berniecrats have more socioeconomic issues in common with Trump supporters than anybody else. It’s why making this about guns is ridiculous.

            1. Praedor

              The term “liberal” (and now “progressive”) has been tossed around so much as a self-identifier by so many in the Democrat Party who aren’t that at all, that the actual meaning of the word doesn’t mean what it once did. The word(s) are now meaningless and used to apply to pro-Wall St coke-snorting Establishment Dems, to pro-Corporate/Free Trade coke-snorting Establishment Dems, to idle rich coke-snorting Establishment Dems that there’s no meaning anymore.

              Perhaps those of us who ARE the classic version of either liberal or progressive should re-term ourselves “Not Them”.

              1. Andrew Watts

                That’s why I’m labeling it as a white bourgeoisie liberal phenomenon. It provides the ethnic/class perspective and equally applies to Wall Street bankers as not. But if you’re right and the term liberal and progressive has lost it’s meaning whose fault is that?

                Actions define words as easily as a debate about semantics. With Bernie’s increasing prominence socialist now seems to be synonymous with “misguided but honest” or “not entirely wrong” which was an evolution from anti-American and treasonous.

                To be blunt, I’ve always thought that most progressives are merely people who are to chickensh– to self-identify as liberal. Seeing a great number of them openly side with Hillary is no shocker.

              2. Elizabeth Burton

                Perhaps those of us who ARE the classic version of either liberal or progressive should re-term ourselves “Not Them”.

                Or just embrace one or both of the labels we all the Establishment Dems are thinking when they deign to consider us at all: “redneck” and “white trash.” Or maybe even that perennial favorite “trailer trash.”

                And we also need to stop being polite when those who are now and/or finally comfortably settled in the middle class where they don’t need to worry about paying the electric bill offer condescending advice. Like yesterday when a friend posted to Facebook that everyone should go get a financial counselor to help them plan for the future. They were most upset with me when I pointed out that was utterly useless advice for people who juggle their bills on a daily basis, because they were all that poor once.

                Which, in my experience, is one of the major problems with addressing the issues of poverty. Far too many people who have managed to escape it, especially older professional types, really don’t remember what it was like. They’ve absorbed the myth that anyone can make ends meet if they just make the proper spending choices, and can manage to set something aside even if it’s just putting the day’s loose change in a jar.

                As someone who on more than one occasion dug in pockets and under sofa cushions praying to find enough of that loose change to make sure my kids had milk for their morning cereal, that kind of smug self-righteousness just makes my blood boil.

                1. JTMcPhee

                  “In Congress on February 10, 1875, an African American representative from South Carolina stated that some whites were “the class of men thrown up by the war, that rude class of men I mean, the ‘tar‑heels’ and the ‘sand‑hillers,’ and the ‘dirt eaters’ of the South — it is with that class we have all our trouble…”

          2. Waldenpond

            I was reading on the difference between liberal and progressive where the liberal ameliorating mechanism is transfer payments and the progressive ameliorating mechanism is regulation.

            Transfer payments inherently require identification and hierarchy (looking down on some other) to distribute transfer payments.

            How do you kick the liberal (the New Deal is transfer payments) out of the New Deal Democrats? Seems the very nature of the beast. What is the dividing line between liberal, progressive and democrat?

        2. MyLessThanPrimeBeef

          First, in the primary phase, Hilary voters were called Low-Information.

          Then, in the months before Nov. 8, she showed that she was no better and used the same condescending tactic and ridiculed the Deplorables.

          What difference?

      3. Tim

        I think the media did too good of a job of forecasting a Clinton win that many stayed home on the rational of passively accepting a clinton win but not contributing to it actively. Subconsciously they could wash their hands of it.

        If those 6-10 million knew hillary was going to lose, I doubt they would have all stayed home. One more reason why Hillary’s unfair advantages backfired and contributed to her loss.

        1. MyLessThanPrimeBeef

          I don’t remember any landslide forecasts to make her supporters so complacent.

          With the FBI drama, there was even less incentive to be lackadaisical.

      4. MLS

        One factor that might matter for the black vote is that they weren’t voting for a black candidate. Comparing 2016 black turnout to 2012 overlooks that dynamic.

        In 2004 about 60% of eligible black voters actually pulled the lever on election day. In 2008 and 2012 this shot up 65% and 66%, respectively. I don’t know what the numbers are for 2016 but I bet they’re a lot closer to 2004 levels.

    6. Tom Stone

      I can’t understand why s o many Americans are opposed to banning the private ownership of Guns.
      Just look how well it worked in Mexico and Venezuela!
      Oh, wait.

      1. jgordon

        Gun ownership and violence are independent variable. Whenever societies break down and become especially violent, authoritarians and their misguided flock seize on video games or guns or whatever as the scape goat for violence. They exist in every era; to retain our freedoms snd independence all we can do is eternally fight them off.

        1. witters

          Please, stop the US gun stuff. Please. Neoliberalism hits globallly and i) guns ain’t stopped it in the US; ii) US people kill other US people with guns at a shocking rate, not the drivers of neoliberallism; and iii) US policing seems to me to thrive on the violence it can righteously unleash on all and sundry for the NL masters when guns are everywhere. And iv) stop saying that YOUR gun is to protect ME from the TYRANTS. I want us to get together and act against them – like my Grand Dad and Dad did when they striked, marched, picketed, and did in support of any workers getting screwed anywhere. Guns are so personalised and politically reactive, not collective and politically active, that contra your claim, I think the modern NL tyrant loves an armed society and the claim of some of them they do not is perfect identity/wedge flim flam. As v) I think we can see in this thread meme.

    7. inhibi

      Does anyone think critically anymore?

      There is no such thing as a “popular” vote if everyone doesn’t vote. It makes no sense. Do you have any idea how many conservatives forego voting in areas like Chicago, LA, or New York because they have 0% chance of swinging the state? Any idea? I don’t. You don’t. No one does. And clearly, as we all saw, we cant consider polls anything more than absolute garbage.

      Also, you want to talk about abolishing the Electoral College? Bye bye minority votes swinging the state. No more would the Dems be able to use the minority vote as their ace in the hole. The minority vote would literally become the minority, instead of being key factors in swinging states like Florida.

      1. Andrew Watts

        We have the electoral college for a reason and it isn’t the minority vote, It’s a way to combat regionalism and in the early days of the country to cede some sovereignty to the states.

        Apathetic and unregistered voters don’t count by default.

          1. Andrew Watts

            I’m not sure what you mean. People who are on the losing side might complain about it every four years but do they do anything about it? The lack of will is a good indicator of how important fixing the Constitution’s messy compromises are.

            Compared to say… GUNZ!

      2. Katharine

        “There is no such thing as a “popular” vote if everyone doesn’t vote.”

        Fiddlesticks! Popular means simply relating to the people, as distinct in this case from electoral, relating to the electors. There is no requirement for numbers of votes to make the people’s vote popular: it is so by definition.

    8. Kim Kaufman

      My understanding is that most of those “popular” votes are from California – not from swing states.

      1. SoCal Rhino

        It’s described that way because they counted relatively late and probably because she really “ran up the score” here, like 2:1. But all votes count the same, it’s as accurate to say that the upper Midwest states did it, or the Clinton votes in Texas.

    9. Vatch

      I think it was a lot more than guns in Pennsylvania and Wisconsin (and also Michigan). It was decades of jobs sent over seas.

      Sanders won the primaries in both Michigan and Wisconsin. Clinton only managed to win the primary in Pennsylvania. Too bad the leaders of the Democratic party were too stupid to realize what would happen in those states when Clinton was running in the general election.

      1. JW

        Plenty of us described that HRC winning red states (or states any Dem would likely lose) amounted to shit. Then got kicked off DK. In hindsight, it’s clear now that a primary vote for HRC was, in fact, a vote for Trump as POTUS. Oh how nice it is to throw that L2E argument back in their faces!

        1. Vatch

          Many people on Daily Kos really have been oblivious to the mood of the country in recent months, haven’t they?

          1. hunkerdown

            I thought DK was like Salon, just a watering hole where party hacks try out the latest neolib lines from Mandy Grunwald and get feedback. It makes participating in mainstream discussion boards a fraught exercise: am I changing minds or helping the enemy?

      2. Vatch

        Perhaps the Democratic establishment was overconfident about the Rust Belt because Clinton won the Democratic primary in Ohio (in addition to Pennsylvania). If so, that was a serious error, because Ohio is another one of the Rust Belt states won by Trump. A lot of people are very upset by what has happened to U.S. jobs in the past 30 years, and the Democratic leaders are absolutely clueless about this.

    10. jrs

      Maybe Dems should stop wasting time running on that issue then, well assuming the vote is even winnable. If this wasn’t a country of economic exploitation and desperation, intense stress, and the social isolation that results from those things, those guns would not be used for near so much violence anyway.

  2. Bugs Bunny

    Re Former Democratic candidate said he will not rule out another presidential bid in 2020

    In an appearance on CNN late Thursday afternoon, when asked if he could have beaten Trump, Sanders said, “What good does it do now?”

    The truth hurts so much, doesn’t it?

    1. craazyman

      70 is the new 40. If Hillary hits the gym and the diet program and Sanders gets pumped up lifting weights maybe we can do this again in 4 years!

      Hans and Frans can pump Bernie up! They can pump Hillary up too. Hans and Frans aren’t just for guys. Look at somebody like Rhonda Rousey or even Judy Hopp the 6″ bunny.

      Even the Big O can get pumped up by Hans and Frans and come back for one more Star Turn — maybe as president of Mars. That would be amazing, when all the billiionaires get to Mars there will need to be elections.

      There was a Mars shack on the internet yesterday. Some British newspaper. It looked like an igloo made from red bricks. I’m not sure Trump would like in a place like that. Even for Trump the White House is just a shack.

      Trump Shack, Tra tra tra Trump Shack
      Trump Shack, wa wa wa Trump shack
      Sign says “no tools” won’t you stay away tools
      Cause winners rule at the Trump shack
      Well it’s set way back in the middle of a field
      He only goes there to wheel and deal
      Just a funky old shack where we do whatever.
      Trump shack tra tra trump shack
      Trump shack baby

      (That’s not very good but I gotta go work)

      1. Optimader

        Hilz needs to split the CFndtn stash, dump Bill hit the treadmill, and pack that back.
        Jayz who has been lyrically pining for her at campaign appearances with his charismatic lyrical stylings will rejigger her femminist chops for 2020 and will help her be more relevaant than evva!

        “You ain’t no better because you don’t be f*cking rappers / You only f*ck with actors / You’re still getting f*cked backwards” –

        Uhh, uh uh uh
        It’s big pimpin baby..
        It’s big pimpin, spendin G’s
        Feel me.. uh-huh uhh, uh-huh..
        Ge-ge-geyeah, geyeah
        Ge-ge-geyeah, geyeah…..

        You know I – thug em, fuck em, love em, leave em
        Cause I don’t fuckin need em
        Take em out the hood, keep em lookin good
        But I don’t fuckin feed em
        First time they fuss I’m breezin
        Talkin bout, “What’s the reasons?”
        I’m a pimp in every sense of the word, bitch
        Better trust than believe em
        In the cut where I keep em
        til I need a nut, til I need to beat the guts
        Then it’s, beep beep and I’m pickin em up
        Let em play with the dick in the truck
        Many chicks wanna put Jigga fist in cuffs
        Divorce him and split his bucks
        Just because you got good head, I’ma break bread
        so you can be livin it up? Shit I..

        And here is a the part that really bring a tear to my eye… lyrical genius. Bill pack up your Fleetwood Mac CD’s and dont let the door git your ass

        But when shit get hot, then the glock start poppin like ozone
        We keep hoes crunk like Trigger-man
        Fo’ real it don’t get no bigger man
        Don’t trip, let’s flip, gettin throwed on the flip
        Gettin blowed with the motherfuckin Jigga Man, fool

        1. craazyman

          I read today on the internet that Trump was uncharacteristically nervous after meeting the Big O at the Trump Shack with all the cameras and photographers. That’s just what the article said. I have no idea myself since I wasn’t there.

          I wonder if the O told him privately about the space aliens under the Trump Shack who rule the earth, dictate policy for the president and fly in and out of the galaxy from ocean bases and Area 51. “This will be the biggest acting role of your life,” the Big O probably told him. “You’ll have to pretend these are all your decisions, but you’ll get your orders from 3 foot tall cone heads with huge eyes.”

          That would freak him out probably. It would freak me out. But it wouldn’t freak out Hans and Frans, they’d take one look at the skinny little dude and say “We want to Pump . . . You . . . Up!” Maybe Trump can Trump them Up. He just needs to recover from the initial shock and make a plan.

          The Trump Shack is a little old place where
          We can do whatevah
          Trump Shack baby
          Trump Shack baby
          Trump Shack,Tra Tra Trump Shack
          Get the country on track at the Trump Shack
          Tra Tra Trump Shack

          (OK, that’s enough on this one. LOL)

          Lord have mercy some of the names being “bandied about” for top positions in the Trump administration are like characters out of an Ed Wood movie. I mean wow. I hope this is just a joke. I remember when Rudy got all pissed off about the African artist portrait of the Virgin Mary. It was really really good, artistically. Really good. The whole thing wasn’t covered with dung it was just a few dung balls hanging from the canvas. There was a lot of real painting on the canvas! Also I heard Sarah Palin was a name being mentioned. Oh man. Chris Christie. Oh man. Is Dracula in there too? How about Bela Lugosi? Oh man. Is this a movie or a TV show? It can’t be real can it?

          oh well, I’m actually not all that worried. I look at the people on the street today and they look like they usually do. I wasn’t attacked by any black people. Mostly they just ignored me. If I’d seen any liberuls though, I’d have run. I saw one walzing down 3rd avenue last night showing the whole sidewalk an Impeach Trump poster. He swagged like a gay boy. You can tell and this is New York. I didn’t say anything insulting to him. I just ignored him.

          If they don’t populate the Trump Administration with a cast of characters from an Ed Wood horror movie, I think it may work out OK.

          1. JW

            What about Melania? I imagine she’s freaking the fuck out! She never signed up for this shit. She had a nice set-up; a quiet life as a 5th ave Trophy Wife where she could easily sneak around on the Donald if she desired. That first-lady life is actually quite a bit of work, and not much private life.

          2. optimader

            Ed wood movie, no kidding. To strike an optimistic note, based on Trump’s M.O. that I(think) I am aware of maybe he might have the inclination to fire an appointee out of hand if they do something untoward, like threatening to bomb some country, rather than keep them around in a misplaced notion of personal vanity.
            Guliani, well, I dressed up like him for Halloween w/ my excellent Nesferatu full head mask..
            so I’ll be getting more mileage out of that maybe?

            So hopefully some of this appointee trial balooning is a Trumperton Window… go way out there then draw it back in to a person that wont seem so objectionable in comparative relief?

            I thinking maybe Chris Christie for Sturgeon General?

            And Barron Von Trump. He looks like a stern faced miniature S.S. agent.. (that’s Secret Service for those that have the Trump Nazi meme thing on their mind) Seems like a polite kid FWIW. His parent taught him to hold his hands to his sides raterhthan making a nervous two hands cup over his package.. So there that. Maybe Barron is his secret confidant?
            And yeah his wife looks veeery pissed. Easier on my eye than Michelle who always looked pissed and was perpetually showing her guns in sleeveless dresses. We know whos in charge.. but thats just a matter of preference.

            Maybe we’ll have our first divorce action against a standing POTUS? That could be a first!

  3. RabidGandhi

    Politico on the Bourbons Clinton Campaign dethroned:

    Clinton Aides Blame Loss on Everything but Themselves

    Not sure I fully buy it, but according to Karni the Big Dog was the contrarian:

    But in general, Bill Clinton’s viewpoint of fighting for the working class white voters was often dismissed with a hand wave by senior members of the team as a personal vendetta to win back the voters who elected him, from a talented but aging politician who simply refused to accept the new Democratic map. At a meeting ahead of the convention at which aides presented to both Clintons the “Stronger Together” framework for the general election, senior strategist Joel Benenson told the former president bluntly that the voters from West Virginia were never coming back to his party.

    “The new Democratic map” Why one earth didn’t anyone warn them about this sooner?

    1. Bugs Bunny

      Big Dog knows who smells the red meat and how to feed them. Hill never had his intuitive sense of politicking.

      As Trump said in his victory speech “This political stuff is nasty, and it is tough.”

      1. polecat

        Hopefully, the ‘Big Dog’ gets a looooong stay at a ‘Big .. Barred .. Kennal’ !! ….along w/ his ‘B!tch’ …

      2. optimader

        The US economic landscape is in large part a result of policies Bill Clinton set in motion. HRC had the tone deafness to state that she was intending on appointing Bill to double down on failure.

        How smart was that?

    2. PlutoniumKun

      I’ve no idea if its true, but it does make sense. He always demonstrated a very acute political sense, given where he came from he must have seen the dangers in rejecting the white working classes completely. I get the impression that its Harvard boys and girls who bought into the demography argument, no grassroots politician (and whatever you say about him, he did come up the hard way) would ever buy into the notion of rejecting and insulting such a large chunk of the electorate.

      1. Cry Shop

        Cigarboy’s speech making, along with Hillary, right up to the end makes me wonder how much hubris there is in the old dog. Apparently it was his idea that the only candidate Hillary could beat would be the populist Trump, and that Trump would also cost the Republicans both houses with no effort required on Team Grifter Clinton. I’d have thought stiff as wood Cruz or even their crime family buddy, Jeb Bush & co would make a far easier opponent to defeat.

        Obama knew he had to run before the greater American community knew him for what he was. Trump was the ultimate Obama style candidate, absolutely no public office record what so ever.

        1. Pat

          Well she might have convinced me she was the lesser of two evils with Cruz, but not so much Jeb. It would have been the oligarch’s great fantasy of a now lose situation for them where they could sit back and watch. So it would be a total roll of the dice with Jeb. At that point it really would have been about turn out and both Campaigns would have had to work hard making sure people got to the polls with probably a lot less money.

          1. Cry Shop

            I think a lot of voters were inspired by anyone but another Clinton, that fervor would be under cut by anyone but another Bush. But the future is hard to predict and impossible to prove the prediction in these scenario so your points are just as legitimate as mine.

      2. Carolinian

        Apparently her campaign, like that ridiculous arrow logo, was a “horse designed by a committee” as the camel joke goes.

        Meanwhile here’s an interesting look at the Trump and the election.

        Throughout this election I said I didn’t believe Trump wanted to win. And judging from the Podesta emails, the DNC helped engineer the Trump ascension to the Republican nomination. Trump was the only guy (along with Ted Cruz) more repulsive to the public than Hillary Clinton. Which keeps reminding me of Mel Brooks’ The Producers.

        Max Bialystock: How could this happen? I was so careful. I picked the wrong play, the wrong director, the wrong cast. Where did I go right?!!

        He suggests Wall Street and some in the military had last minute second thoughts about Hillary and the WSJ article on McCabe was the result. Unclear how this might have shaped the result.

        1. fresno dan

          November 11, 2016 at 9:32 am

          Hilarious and insightful.
          I remember in the Producers where they are looking at potential scripts, and there is one about giant cockroaches, and Zero Mostel SCREAMS “its too good, too good, too D*mn good!!!”
          I imagine that is what Podesta was yelling about Cruz…

        2. Tom

          Wasn’t everything about Clinton designed by a committee this go round? She didn’t run so much as a candidate, but as a public relations firm.

        3. geoff

          ” The big mistake of liberals was to think Trump was bringing fascism, without realizing fascism was already here.” (Steppling from the Counterpunch article linked above.)


        4. Milton

          I’ve circulated that article to my Dem friends to more clearly illustrate how I feel and why I am not disappointed in the election result.

        5. OpenThePodBayDoorsHAL

          Geez the article restates the terrifying “no-fly zone” stuff where the power mad Hilary insists on more carnage but the Pentagon says “lady you really don’t want to do that”. SO THE FRIGGIN PENTAGON IS LESS WAR-MAD THAN SHE IS…let that little tidbit sink in for a minute.
          She transformed State into the New Wars Preparation Committee and almost got control of the Executive. We dodged a real bullet here.

    3. temporal

      The core of triangulation is to say you’re going help the less fortunate and sell to the highest bidder when decision’s are being made. This is how Bill has always played the game. I’m pretty sure that Bill tried to get HRC and crew to stick with the plan but they were too busy schmoozing the elites to realize that taking an early payoff might not be well received by those icky deplorables.

    4. fresno dan

      November 11, 2016 at 7:26 am

      If only we had a better, smarter, more diverse electorate….Oh yeah, and richer. and better looking. and younger too. and one last thing: THINNER – one can never be too thin…
      and one final, final thing – much more stylish. I go to Europe and I am just embarrassed by those tourists

    5. Anonymous

      Listening to Bill would still have led us to another Obama presidency, i.e., fooled lots of people again with hope and change. Maybe we were lucky he wasn’t allowed to be heard.

    6. Waldenpond

      Bill is a grown man. If he thought campaigning to the working class was important, he would have done just that. If he mentioned it, it was out of 1. nostalgia for past glory days and conceit that the voters were just hankering to have Bill back and 2. an unwillingness to accept that people are currently living in his personally created utopia of bank deregulation, outsourcing, and mass incarceration. He’s misjudging the ease with which both of them would have been pounded on this too.

  4. Cry Shop

    Democrats once represented the working class. Not any more Robert Reich, Guardian

    Former Sec. of Labour under Clinton during implementation of Nafta, Robert Reich would know a lot about selling out. For his soul’s sake, I hope he is a changed man, and not simply following the political wind.

    1. Pete

      I can’t remember the title of the book he wrote about the crises but as I recall he stressed the lack of prosecution. I don’t know own how much he has changed. I am probably wrong but I feel like I saw him say something like we were wrong about stuff.

    2. PlutoniumKun

      To be fair to Reich, he’s been quite open about his change of opinion and his shift much more to the left in economics (he was always a social liberal). I think he was one of the handful of mainstream economists to have a genuine reassessment of his views after the 2007 crash. He was one of the few mainstream Dems with something to lose to openly support Sanders.

      1. RabidGandhi

        I’ll buy the “Repentant Reich” line as soon as I see a full mea culpa from him for NAFTA that goes beyond the weasley Dem talking point of “shoulda put in a couple of clauses to help workers”. Till then his occasional bouts of enlightenment seem more opportunistic for bringing stray lefties back to the Team Blue fold than any real concern for pushing a pro-worker agenda.

      2. m_m

        Yes. His article was spot on.
        What’s with all these purity tests? He’s saying the right thing at an important time – that’s what matters.

        1. hunkerdown

          No, what matters is that what he says has nothing to do with what he’s done, and that his speech is, quite possibly, nothing more than an attempt at self-promotion.

          In Haim Saban’s liberal television feels world, where Power Rangers are mighty and they really do morph, speech might matter. But then again, liberals have decided they get to decide who is worthy and who is not, and for some reason there’s a strong correlation between who’s in the deciding chair and the principles that define worth.

          Stop worrying about people’s hearts and start feeding them whether they’re worthy or not. All that leads to is believing this pro-wrestling stuff is real.

    3. Otis B Driftwood

      Reich was a staunch advocate for Sanders until the primary was decided – and then he took the LOTE tack like Chomsky. Given his long history with the Clintons, how can his support of Sanders be viewed as anything other than principled? And he remains a critic of neoliberalism and the only good reason to read the Sunday Insight section of the otherwise irrelevant SF Chronicle.

    4. nippersdad

      He has been all over the place since Clinton got the nom. There was one article on HuffPo that was the antitheses of this one, calling out everyone EXCEPT the Democratic Party.

      1. JTMcPhee

        …the old joke about the candidates for a Policy job, a lawyer, an accountant and economist.. the winning pitch from the economist to the tricky question from the interviewer about “How much is 2 + 2?” was “How much do you want it to be?”

    5. Oregoncharles

      I can’t finish it. He’s condemning the party (not just the Clintons), and I keep thinking, “yeah, but he’s still a Democrat. Still JUST a Democrat.”

      Not good enough, Bob. It’s a national affliction – but Reich knows better.

  5. B1whois

    Yesterday there was the link regarding a pardon for Clinton. On the one hand I want justice, but not if it tears the country apart. I feel like now these Clinton supporters are as unreasoning and as tribal as the Tea Party has been in the past. Crazy times we live in. Maybe we won’t have radical parties on the far right and the far left as one would imagine, but instead have radical factions on the right end of the spectrum of both the left and right parties.
    Are others feeling this way, like we are watching a second rabid faction develop in USA politics? Another group that blindly repeats rhetoric?
    If these idiotic “protests” continue…

    1. JTMcPhee

      How large are the protests? And one of the Big Deals that is trashing any kind of possible broad cohesive polity (ordinary people vs. 0.01%) is this “rule of law” charade where the mopes get fokked, heavily, big time, and the sh!ts like Nixon and Clantons and the Bush League and banksters and generals who sell out their country get to walk, not even a “get out to jail free” card, just a blanket immunity to act with impunity.

      Politics is not beanbag. 0Bomba jailed whistleblowers and Gitmo is still running strong. From the mopes’ point of view, to “believe in the system” there have to be actual, enforced consequences against power people who fokk the rest of us over. The rabid faction has been there — it’s just that that set thought that things were going their way a little more under the FauxDs, even though in reality they were getting shafted by their Hero(ine)s…

      1. sleepy

        From the Guardian article, in Minnesota it was dozens

        In Minneapolis, dozens of people marched on to Interstate 94, blocking traffic in both directions for at least an hour as police stood by.

      2. optimader

        How large are the protests?

        The “protest” in Chicago was on a beautiful fall evening in the 60’sF. A friend on mine quipped “I wonder how many would have shown up if it were cool and raining?”

        They were protesting that Trump won an uncontested election. Back to the intellectual drawing board.

        No reflection on the root cause –a terribly flawed candidate.

    2. Mark John

      The job right now is for the Democratic Party to clean house. . .and fast. I have to told my DFA group that they have a year to get the neoliberal crowd out of leadership or I am dropping out and joining the Green Party. For example, it was floated yesterday that Howard Dean wanted to take over leadership of the DNC. I feel he is too close to the neoliberal, corporate wing of the party, and it definitely would not be a good move.

      I further pointed out that the Green Party would most likely embrace a Democratic candidate if he/she were an actual progressive. Stein seemed open to having Bernie at the top of the ticket, no?

      I feel progressives need to focus on broad, populist and green economic solutions and not get into the identity politics screaming match that seems to be starting. This plays into the hands of the Republicans and the neoliberals, in my opinion.

      1. Roger Smith

        The “fast” speed aspect cannot be stressed enough. There has been a blow and we have a brief reprieve but if there is not swift and immediate action, the Democrats will keep poison in control and fail again and again until something more meaningful happens. These protestors should be outside of DNC headquarters. Brazile should have been out as interim months ago.

        Sanders seems to be coming out fairly well so far but I worry that the timidity he displayed after the primary will resurface here when a robust leader is needed.

        1. MyLessThanPrimeBeef

          Agree with redirecting protests to the DNC.

          Furthermore, I will add that their energy is better spent not on protesting, but on penance, by going to the those districts in the Rust Belt, in PA, MI, OH, IN, WI, etc, and kneel before those dying blue collar workers begging forgiveness, and asking them what Democrats can do to earn their trust back.

          Apologizing and saying “I was wrong” is the first step in this recovery.

      2. cocomaan

        For example, it was floated yesterday that Howard Dean wanted to take over leadership of the DNC.

        Absolutely pathetic and enraging. He was on cable news this morning saying that the DNC did not influence the field of candidates on the democrat side, saying that they did not have the power.

        This, added to people saying that Michelle Obama should run in 2020 (?????) tells me that without a major fight the Dems will not reform.

        1. sleepy

          Schumer and Warren have joined Sanders in supporting Keith Ellison for DNC head.

          Schumer? Is there something bad about Ellison that I don’t know about?

          1. MyLessThanPrimeBeef

            That is always a cause for concern.

            The only way to evaluate this is by getting more information on Ellison and I don’t know much about him myself.

        2. hemeantwell

          As noted in the links, Sanders is mounting a petition to make Keith Ellison DNC chair. I hardly know if Ellison is optimal, or for that matter if staying oriented to the DP is. But to the extent we are interested in changing the leadership’s composition away from the neoliberal etc etc cabal that brought about this disaster, I think we should sign on. Perhaps this can be argued to preempt third party initiatives that might otherwise take shape, but I see this as necessary. A move to purge now, while the Clintonites are demoralized, not only makes sense but it would make me feel better! To the tumbrils with those conniving hacks!

          1. OpenThePodBayDoorsHAL

            The DNC lost the war and must now win the peace, I hold zero hope, much more likely they will completely misread the result and conclude they weren’t far enough to the right.

            What could be more obvious, pick one:
            1. Policies that favor 10% of the people
            2. Policies that favor 90% of the people.

            Number 1 is admittedly much more fun, swan around on Bezos’ jet, lunch with Sergey Brin, a cozy dinner with Lloyd Blankfein, and then the afterparty with Beyonce (her concierge will send the limo).

        1. Katharine

          Why should Ellison be blamed because Schumer has enough political sense to support a move that could rescue his party? If “the rot” are still the majority, Ellison will not be chosen without support from some of them. Would you rather have him be so pure he repudiates the only thing that would get him the job?

          1. RabidGandhi

            I do not blame Ellison in any way and still think he’s a far better choice than Howard “MEK” Dean. All I am saying is that Schumer being there makes me wonder what he is up to, since I trust him as I do adders fanged.

            1. Katharine

              What is he up to? Trying to save what he can from a debacle, after having invested a lot of time and effort in becoming a big wheel in an important party which is suddenly obviously politically bankrupt.

              1. hunkerdown

                To what interest? If he supports the policy people want, his power as a banker’s puppet is nil. If he supports the policy the bankers want, absolutely no recommendation of his can be trusted, since his interests are rival to ours.

            2. NotTimothyGeithner

              Schumer is a pig, but he isn’t stupid.

              What are there options? Dean, a guy with questionable views on social security and abortion (Kerry won for a reason), ethics problems, despised by Bernie, and wedded at the hip to arguably the biggest loser in Presidential contest history in Hillary?

              Another Clinton dope? Kaine? There isn’t much for him to lose this time. Schumer has to act, act fast, and he doesn’t have many choices.

              1. Liberal Mole

                Sanders has the attention of the youth vote and the independent vote. Schumer’s ads for his re-election were annoyingly all over YouTube with a youth demographic in mind (young people saying Schumer wasn’t hip or cool but “okay”.) So he must figure that whatever he does for Wall Street, he still wants to promote himself those new voters who were excited by Sanders.

                How stupid would the Democrats be to hire another neoliberal, when the last batch of DNC chiefs lost voter share and Congress and State Houses galore? We’ll see.

    3. integer

      The people protesting are probably “triggered” by multiple issues; perhaps they didn’t hear about Correct the Record during the election and thought that they had made a bunch of like-minded new friends online. It must feel very lonely now that those imaginary friends have disappeared into the digital ether.

      Seriously though, it was unbelievably irresponsible of the corporate media to present Clinton and Trump in the way they did. Now many must be awakened from the hypnosis session.

    4. MtnLife

      FB is covered with petitions to get the EC to vote for Clinton and had a disturbing level (in my feed anyways) of support. These rabid, head in the sand Clintonites seem seriously intent on provoking a civil war. The comparison to the Tea Party is apt.

      1. cocomaan

        I was listening to liberal talk radio in LA the other night (didnt catch the name of the show, but it was around 91FM at roughly 6pm) and heard them talking about a military coup against trump. “How many generals support him?” was the question asked.

        I understand being angry, but a war will be much worse than having a squealing, tweeting pig in the white house. There are plenty of ways to influence things through Constitutional means.

        1. oho

          ‘hem talking about a military coup against trump. ‘

          Like the full force of the US military was so-so effective against Afghan and Iraqi insurgents.

          A multi-million tank and limitless airstrikes is useless against a hostile civilian population full of insurgents.

          Never mind that not many people in the military would be willing to kill for, or die for, a bunch of disgruntled Hollywood/Portland Dems.

      2. RabidGandhi

        To be honest, as thrilled as I am that HRC can only enter the White House as an oogling tourist, any talk of a petition like this is not the fault of Hillbots but rather of the rancid Electoral College system itself.

        I wonder how different the support here for such a petition would be if it had been Sanders who had won the popular vote and lost the EC.

          1. RabidGandhi

            Golly I dunno, I’ve heard other countries have this “one person, one vote” thinger. Wonder what that’s all about.

            1. MyLessThanPrimeBeef

              I agree that it is the rational thing to do.

              As is doing away with the Senate, or at least reform it to be population proportional.

              On the international front, (the UN for example), India should get 5 times as many votes (or whatever is the ratio) as America.

              And Bolivia should get maybe 1/10th.

            2. JTMcPhee

              What that’s all about? How about a smaller electorate, with lots more history and political awareness and in many cases a lot more homogeneity? And I would not be getting all hyped about popular-one-person-one-vote superiority in places like the Philippines, and Myanmar, and North Korea, and several former Soviet subdivisions, and most of Africa..,

              We in the Empire have what we’ve got. There are some important bits “we” can do to reduce some of the horror, but: Do you really want to roll the dice with a Constitutional Convention? Any bets how the propertied class would make out in such an event?

              The mopes are divided and disorganized, and gee, what a wonderful range of opinions by opinion leaders there are on what might be done to “improve” the structure we have, and “fix” the “glaring problems” with the Bill of Rights, and “correct” Citizens United, and war powers and Commerce Clause and separation stuff…

              “We” do not even have any kind of concise agreed and agreeable statement of what outcomes “we” want from “our” political economy, the one “we” were born into and have to survive while we live, other than (it seems to me at least) “MORE, for me and my peeps, and LESS for all you Others…”

              Foolish me, I used to believe there really was “enough” to go around fairly and decently and in a spirit of comity and amity…

            3. optimader

              Maybe we can streamline the whole process by just having the urban population of the 10 largest cities vote?

              Better yet, just NY-Chicago-LA.. Who else matters anyway?

        1. jgordon

          This is a very unwise proposition. The Electoral College and the Senate were both created to solve a problem that will reemerge the instant one or the other is gone.

          Secondly, these institutions were offeted to the smaller rural states as an incentive to get them to join the federal union. What you are proposing is immoral from that standpoint–you’ve gotten what you wanted out of the 50 state union, and now you’re trying to grab back some of the stuff you promised to get everyone to join up. Just because you have a short memory doesn’t mean everyone does.

          1. Waldenpond

            Tyranny of the majority. As someone in CA, yes I would likely come out ahead. As someone on the left, I recognize that majorities in this country support some pretty atrocious positions I wouldn’t want to see gain primacy.

            Democracy isn’t simply a matter of one person-one vote. It’s about representation of multiple views.

            We have multiple branches of govt and representative govt for balance.

          2. Vatch

            The Constitution stipulates that any amendment must be ratified by three fourths of the states. California, Texas, New York, Florida, Pennsylvania, Illinois, and a few others are the only states that would clearly benefit from the elimination of the Senate or the Electoral College. So neither is likely to be abolished.

            However, states with small populations such as Rhode Island and Montana seem rather odd. I think it would make sense for Rhode Island, Connecticut, and Massachusetts to be joined into one state, and for Montana, Wyoming, and Idaho into another. But that won’t happen.

      3. Arizona Slim

        An FB feed that is covered with pro-Clinton petitions? And that’s all you’re seeing?

        Yeesh, you got off easy.

        Against my will, I was added to a secret FB group called Pantsuit Nation. Puh-leez.

        Thank you, FB, for making it so easy to leave such groups. Forever.

        1. Jim Haygood

          It might be kinda cool to attend a Pantsuit Nation convention in one’s Kim Jong Il suit.

          I’ve got my eyes on one in powder blue. ;-)

    5. NotTimothyGeithner

      This is Bill trying to spin before anyone looks at his own political track record. Bill wants to remain relevant, and donations to the CGI have likely stopped coming in.

      1. integer

        I’m sure all those who have poured money into the myriad of schemes the Clintons have had running are feeling very proud of the principled stance they took by financially supporting these campaigns, foundations, progress centers, and initiatives. Also, those speeches to banks, universities, and corporations, given their profound content, must undoubtedly still be considered money well spent.

        It is very lucky that, being such upstanding members of the global community, they would have never have even considered that there would be any sort of quid pro quo arrangements in place in their dealings with the Clintons.

        1. Tom

          Would love to track the level of donations to the Clinton Foundation and the amount earned from Hill and Bill speeches from about 2009 to a few years from now. Any guesses as to what shape those line graphs would be?

            1. Tom

              They better start grooming Chelsea for public office — maybe she can help the ‘rents replenish the old coffers.

          1. NotTimothyGeithner

            January 2005 was when the donation kicked into high gear. Gee, what happened in November? CGI donations were investments.

          2. John Wright

            Didn’t the CGI vacuum up billions?

            The foundation must have had an effective marketing plan to pitch the inevitability of a President HRC and the favors she would later dispense.

            Maybe there is a “Powerpoint presentation to potential donors” lurking somewhere that will surface.

            The Clintons will no longer be viewed as small time grifters, they truly upscaled their grift with the Clinton foundation.

            1. OpenThePodBayDoorsHAL

              One informed estimate was $200B, and Haiti alone was $15B. If just the simple, on-the-books, black and white laws are fairly and reasonably applied we will see The Beverly Bill and Hil-billies in stylish orange jumpsuits

    6. rd

      If the Republicans want to keep rehashing this stuff over the next four years, then they will just be hastening the return of the Democrats in Congress. She lost the election over this and will never return to USA politics. It is done. The Republicans now have the White House and majorities in the House and Senate. They have to prove that they belong there. Rehashing Benghazi and the e-mails will be political suicide for the Republican Congress if it gets in the way of creating jobs.

      I think one of the first casualties of this election is going to be the Hastert Rule. The first time Paul Ryan (or whoever is Speaker) can’t get an infrastructure bill through a majority of his House caucus, Trump will be on national television telling the American public to contact their representative demanding that a stupid rule named after a pedophile has to be obliterated because it is getting in the way of their lives getting better.

      There are only a few Republicans in Congress who know how to actually govern instead of just oppose a President.

      1. timbers

        If the Republicans want to keep rehashing this stuff over the next four years, then they will just be hastening the return of the Democrats in Congress. She lost the election over this and will never return to USA politics. It is done. The Republicans now have the White House and majorities in the House and Senate. They have to prove that they belong there. Rehashing Benghazi and the e-mails will be political suicide for the Republican Congress if it gets in the way of creating jobs.

        Very much agree with this, put firmly believe to attack/reduce the corruption the Clintons must be held responsible for their crimes, and there a way to do this w/o making it front and center about what your goal is as President. For example one suggestion – no special investigator, but instead below the radar normal channels and a Presidential chat with the responsible person (DOJ?) that their must be an charges make, we already have evidence that a crime was committed – prosectue and that’s a direct order.

        I know their are rules about what the Prez and order the DOJ to do…just as there are ways to do this w/o those rules stopping it.

        Don’t make a issue or show. Just do it. That is essential.

      2. hunkerdown

        Actually, no. You’re focusing on the figurehead, not hacks like Mandy Grunwald who planned the DNC’s anti-Bernie strategy, the Podestas who pulled it all together, and others who will simply do the same thing again for the next loyal tool Wall Street wants to puff up. Those people need to be barred from any and all public trusts or public communications for having supported such an egregious defraudment of the left through a regular order so suited to the task it must have been intended for it.

        I see this already happening with Tulsi Gabbard. There are too many insiders that like her for her to be an uncompromised proper leftist.

        Liberals owe the left reparations, so the best thing that liberals can do right now is shut up, sit down, get over themselves, and start listening to their new orders from their new bosses.

      3. jgordon

        These are criminals who must be prosecuted to restore faith in the rule of law. Letting them go would be unassailable proof that America is a banana republic.

        Putting Hillary, her entire family, and everyone around her in prison will be one of the most popular politically potent things Trump could do in office.

        I have a strong suspicion that he is a sellout and a con artist who will fold to the establishment however. And if that’s so, whoever emerges after another four years of this.. Well, it’ll be fun to watch. Just start getting the guilitines prepped now; we might not have enough.

      4. HotFlash

        The first time Paul Ryan (or whoever is Speaker) can’t get an infrastructure bill through a majority of his House caucus, Trump will be on national television telling the American public to contact their representative demanding that a stupid rule named after a pedophile has to be obliterated because it is getting in the way of their lives getting better.

        If Trump doesn’t/won’t, maybe Bernie or Liz will. The Donald is not the only mouth in DC. And Bernie has a pretty good Rolodex now.

    7. John Wright

      I remember the allegedly “nation unifying” pardon of Richard Nixon by Gerald Ford.

      I was disgusted with Ford at the time and no Profile in Courage award by the Kennedy’s have made this disgust go away.

      In the USA, justice for the well-connected is in obvious short supply after Eric “Place” Holder avoided prosecuting wealthy bankers with Obama’s tacit approval.

      I don’t think the country will be torn apart if Clinton is prosecuted.

      I suspect the media would relish the thought, and might feel they could extract some value from their prior Clinton support.

      And it might give the little people some hope that the US justice system does, sometimes, go after the powerful and well-connected.

      1. pictboy3

        I have been saying to everyone for years now, that Ford is the genesis of the lawlessness of the executive that we’ve been plagued with for years. When he pardoned Nixon, he set the precedent that no matter how badly you violated the law as President, you would face no personal ramifications in the present or future.

        I didn’t realize truly how bad it was until Bush got caught wiping his ass with the 4th amendment through warrantless wiretapping, and not a single politician (that I can remember anyway) called for his impeachment. Instead, they fell over themselves to enshrine it in law so they could give it some semblance of legality, even though it should be obvious to anyone it was devoid of it. Just let that sink in. There was a direct policy to violate his oath of office, and no one even batted an eye. Then Obama does the same thing and expands on his extrajudicial assassination project, and we still get nary a peep. Not even from the Republicans who loath him so much.

        Anyone who ever tells you the slippery slope argument isn’t valid, is full of crap. We’ve had living proof of it as we’ve seen our civil liberties get eviscerated.

      2. Oregoncharles

        +1, John W.

        Like others, I still hold a grudge over Ford doing that.

        Impunity is the root of corruption.

    1. rd

      Re: Potential Trump pardoning himself.

      I think all of Trump’s legal issues are civil in nature, unlike Hillary’s. I don’t know if the power of the pardon covers civil litigation where it is a third-party suing or just criminal where it is the state itself pursuing someone under a legislative law instead of common law.

      1. CRS

        Good point, rd. The article below says that the president cannot pardon a person for violations of any federal civil laws or state criminal or civil laws. So both Hilary and Trump may not be out of the woods yet. Would be interesting to see them both go to jail.


        1. Yves Smith Post author

          Don’t link to sites for opinions about the law. Lordie.

          This is false. Our Jerri-Lynn Scofield has posted on this and she was as researcher back in the day for Lawrence Tribe, the top Constitutional scholar in the US.

          The President’s pardoning power is absolute. Pardoning decisions are not subject to judicial review, nor can any individual pardon be overturned by an act of Congress. The pardoning power’s also unlimited as to offenses against the United States, so in theory, at least as a matter of law, a President could pardon someone for committing any offense against the United States ( I leave to one side the question of whether such an action would be politically possible). A President could also, at least in theory, pardon him or herself– for anything except in cases of impeachment.

          The pardoning power, however, is Federal level, so I believe Trump cannot pardon himself for state law offenses.

          1. pictboy3

            You are correct. The United States in the constitutional setting is usually synonymous with the federal government.

            *Actually on edit, CRS is correct. Pardons only apply to federal crimes. Civil litigation is a completely different can of worms, and federalism keeps the federal government from meddling in state laws. Neither of you said anything untrue, I think that you may be conflating civil and criminal proceedings, which are not the same.

      2. MyLessThanPrimeBeef

        If those civil suits are about money, perhaps another re-organization will take care of it.

  6. charles leseau

    Sorry if this is inappropriate for what this site is all about, but there are some bright people here who might appreciate this announcement, even if most will probably find it about as interesting as staring at a package of Ramen.

    The chess world championship match between world champion Magnus Carlsen and challenger Sergei Karjakin starts today if anyone is interested.

    There are various ways to watch this action-packed duel…of two people sitting in chairs for 5+ hours thinking about the best move.

    Chess24’s coverage: Live coverage with expert video commentary.

    Chessbomb: Live computer analysis plus a bunch of mostly patzers discussing the match and everything else in chat.

    Official site:

    Starts in about 5 hours from the time of this posting. For those that can, enjoy!

    1. johnnygl

      Never watched chess before, but i’d imagine it’s like watching the world series of poker. To make it digestible for tv, you need hours of footage and some very heavy editing before it becomes anything watchable.

      Of course, chess is much more complex, so you’d need good commentators to help people understand and make it interesting.

      1. MtnLife

        Never watched it but I imagine the time between moves would allow for detailed commentary with a far greater depth than poker has.

        1. bob mcmanus

          I vaguely remember Fisher-Spassky on tv, but mostly my chess has been online for twenty years. So “watch” to me means going to a site like Chessbase and watching boards with incredibly informed smart and fun commentary in realtime forums that look like this thread. Sometimes with my chess computer program analyzing moves, but honestly, there were dozens of other people posting analysis from better computers.

          A world chess championship is the Big Party. Find an online site and talk chess.

          1. bob mcmanus

            And the sites linked above look good. Thanks

            Just a note, if you can find a pretty large site/forum, a lot of the commentary won’t be only dry analysis. The fans are much like you, can get bored at points, start subthreads, make jokes, tell history.

            But it is about chess not politics or movies.

            Thanks again. Maybe I needed this after the election.

            1. charles leseau

              Yeah, chessbomb is like that – they talk about everything. As you said in your other post, a world chess championship is a party!

          1. pretzelattack

            it’s hard to be sure what’s going on in the higher dimensions. maybe obama engineered the trump victory so the duopoly could be broken, there.

      2. rd

        IBM should set up Watson to do the commentary. Watson could analyze each move and tell us which player will win or if it is a blunder starting at about move 10 (once they are into the middle game). They will need to figure out if the avatar would be a studious Garry Kasperov type of figure or a perky Emma Watson type.

      3. charles leseau

        Of course, chess is much more complex, so you’d need good commentators to help people understand and make it interesting.

        Usually they try to mix it up a bit. It’s true that the nature of the game at its highest level as in a world championship is going to be sometimes too esoteric for general audiences. These guys are playing at a level far above all but a handful of even experienced tournament players.

        But if one is familiar with the game even as an amateur with modest abilities it’s not unlike watching sports. When the analysts do “if-then” analysis that concentrates on possibilities that can occur after such and so move, it’s possible to appreciate the clever stuff that can occur in something like an 8-move sequence even if we couldn’t conjure up such a combination ourselves, just like we can marvel at footage of Barry Sanders doing crazy moves on a football field while not being able to do anything like it ourselves.

        Chess in the simplest sense is generally divided between two aspects that are spread over 3 phases of the game: Strategy and tactics being the aspects, and opening, middle game, and endgame being the phases. On top of this is a bunch of generalities that even beginners know some of – e.g. the queen is worth more than the bishop, play to control the center, two bishops are worth more than a bishop and knight in an open game, etc. Strategy is high level and can be hard to grasp if it’s not known by the audience or not explained in the commentary. Tactics are the more “fun” moments in chess, where surprises can occur if one person blunders, etc, but hard to see for those who can’t visualize the consequences of the moves they make more than – say – 2 moves ahead. Tactics are unsurprisingly what they concentrate on.

        I’ve seen commentary where they really tried to bring it down to basic explanations of everything for beginners. A good example of this occurred just a few weeks ago with the Twitch blitz match between Carlsen and Nakamura. For the experienced player the explanations felt dumbed down, but I can see the value for more general audiences. As I said in the beginning, usually it’s a mix though, and the stuff the grandmaster analysts usually do is go over move consequences while the players are thinking. It’s not that bad as long as you know the rules of the game.

        1. pretzelattack

          to be fair, it’s hard to cover a blitz match, even the basic explanations have to be pretty basic because there just isn’t time to do anything more.

          1. charles leseau

            Well there’s quickly explaining what’s going on in a quick game, and then there’s explaining basic stuff that’s not far above the level of understanding the rules.

            You’ll see more of what I’m talking about if you watch a bit of the Carlsen-Nakamura Twitch commentary yourself (if you haven’t seen it), though this link for some reason starts well into it.


            …versus top-20 GM Peter Svidler in a June 2016 Banter Blitz show:


      1. charles leseau

        You’re quite welcome. Apparently Yves included a bit about it in the links, but I totally missed it!

    2. Waldenpond

      Chess link greatly appreciated. Saw the notice and wanted a link. I don’t play, but family members do. I enjoy watching.

  7. Marco

    Yves has mentioned many times how foreclosure concentrations in MA fueled Scott Brown’s electoral successs. It would be interesting if there is a correlation with the still-festering foreclosure issues in Upper Midwest rust-belt counties that voted for Obama in 2012 and flipped to Trump in 2016. I remember in 2012 people still willing to give Team D / Obama a pass…HAMP was still being rolled out etc…

    1. rd

      I work on environmental remediation sites and have visited and worked in many depressed communities in the Midwest over the years. The remediation sites tend to be shut down industrial complexes. There is usually little redevelopment on those sites, unlike in places like New Jersey and LA. It is pretty obvious that many of these areas have been ignored, even by their state legislators. Flint made headlines because there were still people living there that were impacted by a series of short-sighted cheap decisions. Foreclosures over the past decade were more about people simply losing their incomes, not because of plunging prices after a bubble. In most of these communities you can buy an entire house for the cost of closing costs in a major city.

      I think Trump just happened to be the brand of gasoline that was available to help burn the house down in DC.

  8. BecauseTradition

    A sound banker, alas, is not one who foresees danger and avoids it, but one who, when he is ruined, is ruined in a conventional way along with his fellows, so that no one can really blame him. JM Keynes via Yves

    Then we should help the poor souls and ourselves by making sure their liabilities with respect to the population are genuine liabilities and not largely a sham* as they currently are. That way, runs on banks would be as easy and convenient as writing a check to one’s account at the Postal Checking Service – dragging precious reserves 1-for-1 with the deposit move. Indeed, organized bank runs for fun and profit would quickly inform bankers that they should not issue liabilities (“loans create deposits/new liabilities”) that they can’t meet at any time.

    *The only way the general population can redeem bank liabilities for fiat is with unsafe, inconvenient, increasingly threatened physical fiat, bills and coins.

  9. PlutoniumKun

    Some people mentioned to me that I was unusually upbeat about Trumps election (I was roundly savaged by a work colleague for daring to suggest Clinton was less than perfect), but the complete downer to me this morning was the news about Leonard Cohen.

    My older brother was a big fan – one of my earliest memories (I would guess I was around 5 years old) was lying in bed trying to decipher the lyrics to Songs of Love and Hate feeding through from the bedroom next to mine. My listening was further confused by the sound of the next door neighbours piano playing (he composed avant-garde jazz for modern dance troupes). I’ve often thought I can blame many of my personality quirks to being exposed far too young to that musical contrast along with Cohens lyrics (I tried so hard to understand what Sisters of Mercy and Famous Blue Raincoat could possibly be about – nobody would explain it to me). His music seems to have followed through my life, even when he fell into relative obscurity. It shouldn’t be sad for someone to die after such a rich and full life, with his latest getting rave reviews, but I feel a part of me goes with him. But we’ll always have the music.

    1. vlade

      Agree – this got me down more than Trump. I was on Cohen’s concert in Weybridge, 2009 (with Suzanne Vega’s opener.. ), and it was one of my concert experiences of my life. I was hoping I could go to another one, but..

      The Future (which was also a soundtrack to Natural Born Killers) is still one of my favourites – especialy the title and Waiting for the Miracle.

      1. JEHR

        In Montreal, where Cohen was born, the residents are putting flowers, candles, and notes on the doorstep of the house he lived in. We Canadians love Cohen and feel he should have received the nobel prize for literature for the lyrics of his songs. (He couldn’t carry a tune anymore than Dylan could but his words are both profane and sacred.)

    2. Jeremy Grimm

      Agree also — the BBC link was the first piece I read today. I’m not a long time fan — I only discovered Leonard Cohen in the last few months. And now he’s dead.

    3. Oedipa

      I’ve seen the future, brother: it is murder.

      What a week.

      I’ve always felt he was underappreciated considering how much the depth of his lyrics and the timbre of his voice overwhelmed me. Though some of his songs always made me laugh because they were so horny.

      So long, Leonard. Thanks for everything.

  10. xformbykr

    Ten-Step Program for Adjusting to President-Elect Trump

    article is directed at young millenials; what about people more directly under threat, i.e., black, brown, female, lgbtq? similar but serious programs are needed.

    one ‘silver lining’ with trump may be to racism experienced on the west coast versus in the south: more diffuse and harder to pinpoint on the west coast.

    so that program should include steps for education and coordination.

    1. RabidGandhi

      I have yet to see any evidence or policy proposals from Trump that are more threatening to the AA and non-Muslim brown communities than those of Bush/Obama/Clinton. From what I gather most of the fear of this is based on oppo from the Clinton camp and a hysterical MSM. This is of course not to discount his horrendous proposals for the Muslim and Immigrant communities, which are indeed utterly reprehensible.

    2. xformbykr

      here is a ‘draft’ more-serious 10 step program:

      10 step program for adjusting to president-elect trump

      1. limit consumption of alcohol, sodas, and other risk-associated
      food and drink, cause you’ll need to be lean, mean and thoughtful

      2. study the character of donald trump, the better to anticipate his actions

      3. study the character of his appointees, because ‘personnel is policy’

      4. keep track of his foreign policy promises versus his actions; this will help with
      determining if he is in control, or if he is being a tool of other interests

      5. keep track of his domestic and social policy positions, in order to anticipate where future
      threats are;

      6. have a serious look at social activism; the oligarchy will continue on its quest to
      continue to extract wealth from the non-oligarchy, and governments are unlikely to help;
      yes, social activism is not as strong as corporate power, but it’s all there is. also
      the contacts may comprise important sources of information and status (but see #10 below)

      7. however, be aware of the widespread surveillance of all electronic communications and monitoring;

      8. don’t assume that all of the people who voted for him are rabid racists; but OTOH
      it may be that 30-50% of them lean that way; thus, the election did serve as a gauge
      of that sentiment, but it needs to be discounted; it’s basically what decent people are
      up against.

      9. determine some actions that you’d be really glad to see from any president; then if
      trump does any of them, provide ‘attaboy’s to your friends and relatives; for example,
      if he meets with putin for the purpose of ‘partnership’, that could be very good. yes,
      your friends and relative might say “that shows he’s putin’s puppet!” so, alas, be prepared
      to defend your position;

      10. identify and support non-mainstream media outlets; the mainstream outlets are only

    3. jgordon

      Trump sucks and is probably a sellout. That said you aren’t under threat from Trump, or at least Trump is much less of a threat to you than Hillary would have been.

      Aside from the ignorant identity politics maligning of Trump’s supporters, I think you have a good plan. You should have been running that plan against Hillary as well if you’d had the chance, though honestly I don’t think enough people would have survived the nuclear fallout to make it worthwhile.

      1. BecauseTradition

        Trump sucks and is probably a sellout.

        Huh? What does he need more money for? Legacy is another matter…

  11. Knifecatcher

    That New Balance protest is NUTS. They’re exactly the kind of company we should be touting as a model – in spite of the Nike led manufacturing race to the bottom they’ve managed to keep some of their US factories open, albeit for high end shoes only.

    If any company has earned the right to say “we’re happy politicians are supporting US manufacturing again” it’s New Balance.

    1. fresno dan

      November 11, 2016 at 8:43 am

      Well, I take it that they are using New Balance as a surrogate for Trump in general.
      But I agree with you – either the protesters are woefully ignorant of TPP and trade, or they just have utter contempt for people who work in shoes and textiles here in America and think it should be all out sourced.
      Of course, they will frame it as all racial, and I will frame it as substantially class/economic.

      1. apber

        Either the protesters are woefully ignorant about too many things, or they just like the $20/hour paid through Soros to scream epithets. Amazing to me that this billionaire has not been killed for the havoc he has caused on a global basis. It’s all about creating division, folks; whether cultural, racial, or gender; the elites have greater control when the sheep are so occupied.

        1. Yves Smith Post author

          I’m letting this comment through only to lecture you. Stop running conspiracy theories. I’ve spoken to people a little younger than me whose kids are totally hysterical over the Trump win. This is organic. The upset is not well focused or thought out, which is why I’m harrumphing about it above. None of these unhappy people are willing to suffer or take real personal costs as protestors did in the 60s. The reason Daniel Ellsberg decided to release the Pentagon Papers was he knew people personally who were sentenced to years of prison for opposing the war, and as one of America’s top experts on Vietnam (he was the one who first briefed Kissinger), he knew the war was a crock. He anticipated he’d go to prison too. Is anyone willing to make this sort of sacrifice now for their beliefs, or the people they say they care about? No.

          As for Soros, yes, he funded the color revolutions, but there is no evidence he’s done bupkis in the US. The Dem $ which went into Black Lives Matter, which included his, was to domesticate it. They were being too effective in their die-ins and other protests. The Dems always hippie-punch or neuter the real left.

          1. apber

            The now infamous Scott Foval was exposed by Project Veritas as hiring “bird doggers” to disrupt Trump’s rallies. Two of the organizations which whom he worked have ties to Soros funding. After he was fired, he revealed in several tweets that his group and other similar ones were behind the Ferguson riots and that they were paid and given the same black and yellow signs. I fail to see how is is a conspiracy theory. There is a concerted effort in this country to generate division, whether class, race, etc. Do I know for certain that Soros money is involved? No. But he contributes greatly to organizations like Media Matters that are the chief developers of these protests, which often turn ugly.

          2. OpenThePodBayDoorsHAL

            Kudos on your and Lambert’s excellent curation of the site, it’s one of the main things that makes NC great.
            In the heat of battle many (including myself) stray into the realm of the unwell…but even in an era where conspiracy theories become conspiracy facts with depressing regularity it’s critical to paint a line between the two. Mes compliments

          3. RMO

            Yves: Out of curiosity, if a comment goes into moderation and is removed is there a notice to the poster and a warning or would it only come in the case of a post being kept up like the one above: I’ve had one post never show up but wasn’t sure whether it was just a glitch or if it was indeed rejected. If it was removed I’m actually grateful for it – almost immediately after hitting the post button I regretted it. I was tired and angry at the time, not a great way to engage in a discussion on the internet. I really appreciate the job done moderating the site in that it allows a wide range of differing views while keeping the comments stream respectful and readable.

            1. Yves Smith Post author

              A comment that goes into moderation is never “removed”.

              It hit a software tripwire and never appeared on the public part of the site. It went into our moderation queue, which only site admins can see.

          4. Oregoncharles

            There are people being arrested for, eg, Molotov cocktails in Portland. However, i think they’re our local anarchists, seizing an opportunity. Deep conflicts with the police in Portland.

    2. Pat

      I need a new pair of sneakers, I might have to dig in the couch cushions and come up with enough to buy New Balance. And then write them a letter and tell them why.

      1. rd

        I have been buying New Balance sneakers for 20 years. They are sturdy and stable, which is good for somebody on the heavy side. The foot bed has good arch support. The fact that they were made in the US was icing on the cake. They are the first brand I try on in a store when I am buying sneakers. I just restocked with two new pairs last year after my other ones died after many years of hard use.

        I understand the protests against Trump’s racism and misogyny during the campaign. The protestors are totally missing the point on New Balance.

        However, the protestors on the right against Chobani hiring 15% (300 of 2000) of their work force from the immigrant population is also missing the point about what America is all about. The founder himself is a Turkish immigrant who set up his business in a dying town in upstate NY and then building a plant in Idaho, exactly what is needed for this country to prosper. So, we still have a lot of learning and healing to do on both sides.

      2. John k

        They have both high arch (lath 1 vs 2) and ultra wide models for those that need them. Only brand that fits me, plus mesh for sweaty feet.

    3. temporal

      Protesting in favor of a neo-liberal society.

      Outsource our jobs, please.

      What do we want? No jobs! When do want them? Right now!

      Standing together for “Right to Work” (nominated for best phrase misdirection ever).

      1. polecat

        Well, that’s what you get when the youth of the country receive a ‘common-corn-holed education’
        that espouses pseudo-liberal SJW Brondo …… over real liberal instruction, which should include history & civics ….. instead of being taught to the D.C. test, …… whilst tweeting and faceborging into tiny screens !

        That’s a recipe for idiocracy !

        1. polecat

          I mean … when kids have no conception that the # sign might mean lbs. …. rather than ‘hashtag’, you know humanity is doomed for failure …. ‘;[

  12. lina

    So I read here frequently but don’t post much. I quit all social media and MSM back this summer when this election nonsense got too heated for me to handle and Bernie was not nominated.

    My question to all you folks on here: I know it’s neither here nor there at this point, but I feel as though had Bernie been the Dem candidate, we’d be talking about Pres Sanders now. Is that what most think?

    1. Yves Smith Post author

      No question. In every 1-1 poll when Sanders was campaigning versus Clinton, he did better versus Trump than her by at least ten points. Sanders would have won in a landslide.

      1. allan

        Indeed. But this is what a trio of WaPo’s finest journalists wrote on Wednesday:

        Sen. Bernie Sanders (Vt.), who challenged Clinton for the Democratic nomination, has argued, with questionable plausibility, that he would have been a stronger standard-bearer against Trump.

        They don’t call it Pravda on the Potomac for nothing.

        1. Vatch

          I forgot to mention that the single poll where Sanders was only 4 points ahead was a Fox News poll. I wonder whether there was anything screwy about the wording of the poll !?

  13. fresno dan

    It is too soon, but expect in a few months to see the comparison of Obama and Trump policy and how similar they are. Everybody remembers all the things Obama SAID he would do, what he DID, and how SIMILAR it was to Bush? And everyone remembers all the things Bush SAID he would do, what he DID, and how SIMILAR it was to Clinton? And everyone remembers….

    Maybe the reason our politics is so crappy is our media’s really rather unsophisticated analysis and understanding of politics, and the easy, facile emphasis on all things presidential. And I suspect a good deal of it is that the president is just so much cheaper to cover.

    1. OpenThePodBayDoorsHAL

      You just *cannot* go by the sound waves that emit from the openings between their noses and their chins. Did he or didn’t he close Guantanamo? Did he or didn’t he “surge” in Afghanistan? Did he or didn’t he expand overseas “covert special military operations” from 50 to 75 countries? Did he or didn’t he enshrine and enforce a blanket free pass policy for all banking crime? We used to have Walter Cronkite et al to help us research the answers but now we’re on our own.

  14. PlutoniumKun

    Trump Ascends to the Cherry Blossom Throne – Tyler Sic Semper Tyrannis (Kfathi). A contrary view to the links above, and today’s must read.

    Interesting view, but I think it gives too much credit to Trumps cleverness. He has an instinctive brilliance for politics (which is basically just self marketing), but its pretty clear that his knowledge of the workings of the world outside his property empire could be written on the back of a napkin. I find some of the people clustering around him really quite terrifying. I can just hope he is floating trial balloons with the intention of putting more sensible people in later. But on the optimistic side the fact that Sanders and Warren seem to be putting out feelers indicates that they sense there is something they can work with.

    1. Katniss Everdeen

      Interesting addendum to that article, by its author, regarding obamacare, in the comments:

      Trump needs do only two things to succeed.

      – Not start a shooting war with Russia
      – Follow the law

      That’s it. I include Obamacare under “Follow the Law” because it is currently held up by an unwieldy foundation of administrative diktats, groaning under its own weight. This is his power, his Trump card, if you will. Argue all you want to, but the reality is that while Trump is not responsible for Obamacare like the Dems are, he controls what will happen with it. Not Pelosi. Not Schumer. If he steps back and says “I’m just going to follow the law as written” that thing is DONE the next day in spectacular fashion.

      I’m thinking specifically of the employer mandate which has not yet been enforced–by “administrative diktat”–and, as claimed at the time, probably “never” would be.

      1. PlutoniumKun

        I wonder though if he would do that to Obamacare without there being something to replace it. Whatever its many faults, here are several million people now using it (many if not most would be Trump voters), and the headlines if they suddenly found themselves without insurance would not be good. If only there was someone there to whisper in his ear ‘just extend Medicare to everyone!’

    2. fresno dan

      November 11, 2016 at 9:00 am

      I agree. To me, Trump wasn’t so clever as all the other candidates are so, so, stupid – well, stupid is too harsh.
      What is a better word – old foggies who in 1950 or so can’t believe this Elvis Presley guy can ever be popular? They haven’t seen it before, so it is beyond their comprehension. If they haven’t seen it work, it can’t work….It says something about the box our political culture is sequestered in.

      Take the polices of the repub candidates (OKAY sticklers, except Paul) and than take the Clinton/Obama policies. On fighting ISIS, the truth of the matter they were in lock step But THEY CAN”T SAY THAT. (REMEMBER – they ALL, each and EVERY ONE were gonna get the Saudis to do it!!!). So endless words are expended trying to finagle some differences between them. If Trump hadn’t run, one of them would have been the nominee – and there wouldn’t have been a dime’s difference between them OR Clinton on substantive issues like banks, trade, war.
      AND, so many, many of these policies are so, so, so unpopular. I know I have posted, and there have been in the links many times how many policies supported by both parties are not supported by a majority.

      Finally, I was reading an article in ProPublica, doing an analysis of Trump voters, and the thing that she said, a woman who had never voted, is that Trump speaks plainly.

      1. NotTimothyGeithner

        Hillary-Jeb would answer the question what happens if they held an election and no one came. The media would have had a grand time. They wouldn’t have to learn any new names or anything.

    3. HBE

      If trump is serious about some of his populist rhetoric, Bernie definitely has the possibility of working with trump on infrastructure building and trade.

      If reddit is any indicator of the general outlook of trump supporters (not never hillary trump voters, but day one supporters, his true base), his base certainly has a fairly strong respect for Bernie and what his supporters were trying to achieve. They saw Bernie as an outsider akin to Trump and that seemed to make him “alright” in their book.

      This would seem to leave open a chance for the Bernie wing to work with trump to the benefit of labor. We will see.

  15. Anne

    I see Trump has his Twitter back, taking the time last night to call out the protesters as “unfair:”

    Just had a very open and successful presidential election. Now professional protesters, incited by the media, are protesting. Very unfair!

    So like Trump to brand them as “professional,” to take away any credibility they might have.

    But a few hours ago, and in typical Trump fashion, he had a change of heart:

    Love the fact that the small groups of protesters last night have passion for our great country. We will all come together and be proud!

    Great way to get started.

    We had some protests here in Baltimore last night. This morning on my FB, someone referred to the protesters as “whiny little children” and chalked it up the the “everyone gets a trophy” thing. I couldn’t help myself, and responded:

    No, this is the result of a little thing called the Constitution , and its addendum, the Bill of Rights. These are two of our most basic and precious freedoms, the right to speak and the right to assemble. Did you regard the original colonists as “whiny, petulant children” because they protested and revolted against the British government, beginning a movement that ultimately led to the formation of this country and the establishment of freedoms we enjoy to this day? I don’t think they were handing out trophies then…and maybe you haven’t been paying attention, haven’t seen how people who protest have been treated lately here and around the world, but it takes courage to take to the streets. There is risk in civil protest, especially if you are a person of color. You should be defending this right, not mocking it, because one day, it could be you who wants to be heard, you who wants to protest, you who has something to say from somewhere other than the safety of social media. These people aren’t protesting the Democratic process, they are an example of it.

    Will no doubt be flamed into little embers by those who only ever want to hear one message, but it annoys the crap out of me that protest has been so demonized here. Some will grudgingly give their blessing, but only if it doesn’t disturb or interfere with their lives. So much easier to ignore that way, I guess.

    Ignorance abounds.

    1. MtnLife

      Where were these protesters when Hillary was supporting death squads in Honduras or when Obama was killing >90% innocent people with drone strikes? They are hypocrites who only got off their butts to say/do something when it wasn’t their team winning/doing the evil. In this respect, I’m glad Trump won so that these part time liberals fight the same policies they would have supported under Hillary. Don’t get me wrong – I’m happy they are finally fighting but their credibility is suspect.

      1. NotTimothyGeithner

        These are very small protest at the moment. Black Lives Matters types get more. Obviously BLM and Occupy types won’t get the same coverage from the msm which needs to regain credibility.

      2. Anne

        You have no idea whether these protesters were people who suddenly woke up and decided it was time, or if they have been actively involved in political activities and actions all along.

        Where were you, by the way? Out in the streets, organizing rallies and speeches in the public square? Should I tell you i think your indignant reaction to the recent protests is also hypocritical? Should I be questioning your credibility because you’re registering your disdain from the anonymity of the internet?

        Let’s face it: we could be in the streets every damn day about something. Are any or all of us hypocrites because we’re not? Is our protest of one thing – and it could be anything – invalid because we didn’t protest something else?

        In my mind, we should be welcoming protest, not being suspicious of the motives or of the people who are doing it. I have no idea – and neither do you – which candidate other than Trump these protesters voted for, or even if they voted at all. Should that matter, too? There’s nothing in the Bill of Rights that requires proof of voting in order to exercise one’s free speech and assembly rights, last I checked.

        That being said, I think if this is going to be a government of, by and for the people, the people need to demand their government make voting a priority so that more people can and will do it. Early voting, voting by mail, election day a national holiday, automatic registration: if you are a citizen, you shouldn’t need to register to vote, you should just know that you’re already fully vested in the process – and then it’s just a matter of showing up.

        People protesting Trump’s win isn’t going to change the outcome of the election; I’m kind of holding my breath waiting to see what’s in store – and i suspect a lot of it will be very protest-worthy.

        1. MtnLife

          Anecdotally, my actual protester friends are more in a “told you so” mood right now and everyone (okay, 95%+ 1/20-30something) supporting the riots are fairly well off older millennials (read: young credentialed class) who were fully behind Obama and HRC sans criticism. This may just be my snapshot but it spans the country so you’ll have to excuse me raising an eyebrow at their sincerity.

          1. integer

            First they came for the Democratic Socialists, and I did not speak out—
            Because I was not one of the deplorables.

            Then they came for the Trade Unionists, and I did not speak out—
            Because I was not one of the deplorables.

            Then they came for the Russians, and I did not speak out—
            Because I was not one of the deplorables.

            Then they would have come for me—but thankfully the deplorables united and put the Clintons in the political garbage can.

          2. Anne

            Speaking only for myself, I very much support the right of the people to protest; I don’t support vandalism or violence. I did not vote for either Obama or Clinton; in 2008, I left the top of the ballot blank and in 2012 and 2016, I voted for Jill Stein.

            I guess this thing is running along several tracks for me. I think there are people out there protesting Trump or registering their non-recognition of his coming presidency who weren’t Obama or Clinton supporters. I think there are also Clinton supporters out there doing the same thing. I think it’s likely that they are doing it for different reasons, and the question is, does the reason matter if the goal is the same?

            Is the protest by a Clinton supporter less valid because it may be part of an overall denial of the reality that Clinton was largely responsible for her own loss? I guess people will have to answer that for themselves and decide if it matters.

            I understand the desire to make a statement of anger at his election, but where is that going? And will it still be there and will they still be visible when Trump begins to implement actual policies with which they disagree?

            I guess we’ll see soon enough.

          3. polecat

            I watched some video samplers of these supposedly ‘po’ed and frightened’ youth .. they certainly didn’t look i’ll cared for or destitute in my estimation ….. could be a form of mass delusion …or not !

            1. a different chris

              If I dress well on the way to the gas chamber do you say “hey he looks like he’s doing pretty well, why the glum face?”.

              Let’s not judge people from pictures.

    2. fresno dan

      November 11, 2016 at 9:01 am

      “Just had a very open and successful presidential election. Now professional protesters, incited by the media, are protesting. Very unfair!”

      “Love the fact that the small groups of protesters last night have passion for our great country. We will all come together and be proud!”

      Well, at least someone is looking at his twitter who has some brains in his/her head. Hopefully, in a few days this someone will get complete editorial control and we will not get unfiltered looks into Trumps id. (and I think we will all be better off for it)

      And to me, the protests, which really are relatively small, but I still think newsworthy (as they say in the links, “hundreds” are not “big”) ironically provide one of the compelling reasons Trump won – spectacle, flash, exciting pictures get news coverage. Live by shallow news coverage, die by shallow news coverage…
      Will Trump be as masterful as Reagan at media manipulation???? I doubt it, cause after all, BESIDES being an actor, Reagan really was a highly skilled politician. On the other hand, I think our culture and media has really, really declined since Reagan, so maybe Trump will continue to use the media to his own ends….

      The fact that both CNN and FOX cover them so much, albeit from very, very different points of view I think buttresses my point…

      1. Yves Smith Post author

        The Trump staffers use a different device than Trump does to post on Twitter. So it can be determined factually whether Trump made the second tweet or not. I don’t like people reaching conclusions when they don’t have a factual basis. You need to at least consider the possibility that Trump may be starting to realize he needs to sound more moderate.

    3. johnnygl

      This election has really brought the worst in a lot of people. There’s a lot of trump supporters who are sore-winners. There’s a lot of clinton supporters who are really convinced the world is ending.

      Some of the people on the Real News Network, paul jay, in particular, are convinced this is another round of bush-cheney. Maybe i’m naive/optimistic, but i don’t see that happening. I don’t think trump wants more war. He’s been fairly consistent(for him) on this issue and even slapped down pence when needed.

      There is a definite danger that trump goes orthodox repub, but if he does so, his support will fade rapidly and dems will crush midterms.

      I just want the warren/sanders wing to grab hold of the steering wheel by the time trump screws up. They need to move quickly becuase i suspect it won’t take long.

      I really feel terrible about how frightened many of my LGBT and non-white friends are and want to provide reassurance, but it’s obviously too early to tell if they are right or i am.

      1. oho

        ‘I really feel terrible about how frightened many of my LGBT’

        …say the supporters of the candidate who got rich accepting money from vehemently anti-LGBTQ Saudi Arabia.

        I always scratch my head at that one—though Pulse changed the minds of some gays.

      2. aletheia33

        these frightened protesters do not realize that they have been cynically manipulated through their fears, any more than working class whites have realized the same thing for literally centuries.

        optimistic, but: perhaps some recognition of, and refusal to surrender to, that kind of manipulation on all sides can arise from the influence of individuals/leaders who commit firmly to an approach of mutual understanding and respectful communication instead of mutual dismissal and contempt.

        sanders models this pretty well, but it has been hard for him to become known to and earn the trust of those least well informed. if he can get attention around this issue, maybe that will help the situation.

      3. Katniss Everdeen

        I just want the warren/sanders wing to grab hold of the steering wheel by the time trump screws up.

        Maybe I’m naive/optimistic, but is it so inconceivable that Trump, Sanders and Warren–economic populists all–could work together to reshape the policies of the last several decades that have led to the widespread economic distress and gross income inequality that has devastated the american middle class?

        They each seem to have roughly the same goals in mind.

        And easing the economic anxiety that has been festering and ignored for so long, will go further to resolve the fear of the “other” than any “hate crime” legislation or identity policing ever could.

        1. aletheia33

          >easing the economic anxiety that has been festering and ignored for so long, will go further to resolve the fear of the “other” than any “hate crime” legislation or identity policing ever could.<

          well put, katniss!

        2. Tom

          I sure hope you are right about the three amigos — imagine if they focused their varied and considerable skills on achieving the same goals.

        3. johnnygl


          You’re right about the opening for trump to work with warren/sanders. They’ve both held out the olive branch. If he doesn’t accept, he will fail and fail pretty quickly in my view. If he looks for common ground, he can really help reshape the political landscape in this country.

          The choice is trump’s to make. We’ll know in a few months how this will play out. These may prove to be interesting times.

        4. Anne

          I think part of the problem may be that to the extent Trump has economically populist plans/ideas, they may be at cross-purposes with the effects of some of Trump’s other plans – the ones he’s likely to get GOP support for.

          And I’m not sure he has anything in his bag of tricks that will alleviate economic anxiety as immediately as some of those things – like repealing and replacing the ACA – will exponentially increase it.

        5. Katharine

          Trump appears to be strongly pro-pipeline. That’s hardly in line with Sanders and Warren. But I think the early Sanders statement was exactly right: if there are points on which they can agree, they should work together on those, regardless of whether they fight over others. I am old enough to remember when that was normal behavior in Washington.

          1. MyLessThanPrimeBeef

            That’d be great if they can work together.

            Will Trump have some Democrats in his cabinet?

    4. Waldenpond

      Electoral college. The EC exists for a very good reason.

      First is the light switch like hypocrisy. The D base doesn’t protest the D politicians no matter the horrible the consequences domestic and foreign. They have been absent and making excuses for the last 8 years because what? O has a nice smile? R wars are bad, D more-wars are fine. R spying was bad, D spying is acceptable. Protesting because someone has an R after their name instead of a D when they enact the same horrid policies is not likely to get support. They did not protest on behalf of occupy, they do not protest never-ending war, they do not protest on behalf of poverty, they do not protest on behalf of DAPL, they do not show up to labor strikes etc.

      Second, it’s what they are protesting, not that they are protesting.

      We are 50 states before we are one country. If you do not support having 50 states and support having one federalized region, protest the outcome. States, themselves, have challenges distributing costs and benefits. I, personally, would not remove state boundaries as I find large groups ungovernable and would divide my state (CA) in at least half.

      We are a representative government, not a democracy. If you support a one person-one vote system, by all means, protest. But, the tyranny of the majority is factual. I will be in one of the states that will determine the outcome of every election and I believe CA, NY and TX will use some small state as a dumping ground for all of it’s nuclear, coking, plastics manufacturing, pharmaceutical etc waste.

      And for those that just want undue influence on the presidential race? pfft. Just more hypocrisy.

      1. JSM

        Yup. & don’t forget the ‘let’s bring in/raise up/propagandize etc. enough of our guys so we can have a vibrant one-party tyranny that can never be voted out.’ Leave the electoral college alone, methinks.

      2. curlydan

        As a resident of KS, I think the electoral college is really annoying. I literally had to drag myself to the polls, deflated and discouraged, in order to vote. The only motivator being (i) lodging my protest vote against the Democratic party (via Stein) and (ii) voting to retain a bunch of very conservative Supreme Court justices who want to fund my kids’ schools at adequate levels and prevent Sam Brownback from putting even more conservative justices in there.

        The winner take all EC has been figured out in our Internet Age. Get rid of it or change it out of winner take all. I don’t mind 535 electors, but I do mind winner take all or voting by gerrymandered districts. Make it proportional to a state’s popular vote.

      3. hunkerdown

        “We are” — superstitious. Representative government is the means, method and opportunity for permanent inequity, and brainwashed Americans enjoy learned helplessness too much to get rid of it.

        I contend that there is no argument for republicanism that does not fancy itself morally qualified to divine the virtue of another and run their lives. Let’s get rid of this nonsense instead of reenacting the past like children trying to work a rain spell.

    5. Kurt Sperry

      I think it likely the difference in tone between the two cited tweets is down to Trump authoring the first, and some staff tasked with damage control authoring the second.

    1. Village Idiot

      Makes you wonder how many of those Trump “supporters” encountered by the Clinton GOTV crew were actually still on the fence (part of the 30% or more of the population that couldn’t stand either candidate), and finally held their noses and voted Trump just to spite the MSM, celebrities, elites, and that “liberal” who rang the doorbell last Wednesday night.

  16. NotTimothyGeithner

    It looks like future Minority Leader Schumer (he would have been insufferable as majority leader, so silver linings) is joining Sanders and Warren’s calls for Keith Ellison as DNC chair.

  17. PlutoniumKun

    Green loons pursue wowser apocalypse MacroBusiness

    Dreadful stuff from the Greens – and I thought the Aussie Greens were among the more sensible ones. My personal experience of various Green Parties in Europe is that while they have some excellent activists and politicians, and are right in most things, they are also prone to some of the worst excesses of whiny identity politics.

    1. Andrew Watts

      One of the majors problems with the Greens in the US is the lack of realization that even though we have a two party system every wing of the major parties is it’s own power base. Trump succeeded in mobilizing the populist wing of the Republican Party, While Bernie was trying to bring the social democrats, socialists, and other assorted lefties back in from the cold to fight the neoliberals.

      It was a personage no less than John K. Galbraith who warned the Left they’d be abandoned in the political wilderness but to keep the fires burning for the struggle to come. In my intemperate youth I sneered at that viewpoint and joined the anti-globalization movement to tear down the Washington Consensus but I see Galbraith’s wisdom now.

          1. Katharine

            I forget which great blues singer responded to the foofaraw about what was folk music by saying, “It’s all folk music. I ain’t never heard a cow sing.”

            Blessings on anyone who enjoys any kind of music! They are using an important part of their brain, closely linked to poetry and emotional communication.

      1. LifelongLib

        My personal theory (I welcome argument/correction) is that many of the people who in the due course of things would have become the left wing of the Democratic Party instead became involved in the anti-Vietnam War movement and then left conventional politics. This cost the Democrats a generation of vigorous membership/leadership. Right-wingers on the other hand continued to join the Republican Party and ultimately came to dominate it. The left was sheared off from the Democrats; the right became part and parcel of the Republicans, and hence far more powerful in our two-party system.

        1. Andrew Watts

          I wouldn’t disagree as I think the left was fractured during the Vietnam Era. Trade unionists were confounded and often times at odds with young radicals especially over the war. The main focus of the New Left were social issues. The middle class radicals had differing values than what could be the termed the Old Left. The Christian socialists, who dominated the old Socialist Party, were lost to the Left en masse when evangelicals gyrated back to the right.

          I’m hopeful that a lot of these trends will reverse or evolve though.

  18. FreeMarketApologist

    Re Protesters:

    I pass by Trump tower (5th Ave NYC) almost every day, and it’s been a crowd of gawkers since Monday. However, the number of protesters seems to be a small percentage (<10%) of the overall group. Police aren't corralling them any more than anybody else*, and the entire mood seems pretty benign.

    (* They have a security nightmare on their hands as the building is far too exposed and open to provide any real security. The city is using large dump trucks parked nose to tail on 5th Ave as a security wall. The allusions and metaphors are left as an exercise for the viewer.)

  19. Qrys

    Trump’s Transition Team Works to Form Cabinet Wall Street Journal.

    So is it to be Cabinet Apprentice now? I wish they’d film it so we could at least find out who gets fired and why…

    1. fresno dan

      November 11, 2016 at 9:30 am

      I agree
      I think it would be refreshing if Trump did fire people – instead of people who always have to leave to spend more time with their family….
      Supposedly, not one US government employee was fired, despite the billions upon billions we spend on “intelligence” after 9/11. (Why do we spend so much money on something that doesn’t work>>>)
      I have read that even FBI agents who squashed investigations recommended on some of the hijackers were PROMOTED. We didn’t even fire the president…

      1. NotTimothyGeithner

        Richard Clarke’s charge was the CIA was running an op to recruit two of the hijackers here in Florida instead of turning over these wanted men to the FBI or alerting the FBI they wanted to run this kind of operation.

        1. OpenThePodBayDoorsHAL

          Putin, yes THAT Putin, was hair on fire with warnings to the US about the Tsarnaev brothers before they came over, three times they screamed “It’s them! It’s them!”, but the Panopticon was much too preoccupied parsing emails with recipes from Grandma in Kansas to pay any attention

  20. Synoia

    Silicon Valley’s Call to Secede Shows How Out of Touch It Is MIT Technology Review (resilc). Instead of funding all those apps, maybe they should have thought about funding a ton of desalination plants and plowing over all of their vanity water-hogging vineyards.


    Two methods:

    1. Vacuum Distillation using stream form an electricity plant
    – Value of Electricity $100 lost to produce 1 cubic meter of water
    – Value of water produced less than $1.
    2 Reverse Osmosis
    – Cost of Water in San Diego from Colorado River $0.45 per cubic meter
    – Cost of water in San Diego from RO $1.00 per cubic meter.

    Desal is not cost effective.

    1. polecat

      I wish there were a way to ‘osmote’ Silicon Valley back to orchards again ….. ??

      “Oh, to behold a sunny vale”

    2. a different chris

      And when they run out of water? Enron did it deliberately, but marginal cost is still a real thing.

    3. MyLessThanPrimeBeef

      I want to say, grape-lives matter, but not as much as human lives.

      But I can’t. All lives matter.

      The right way is to reproduce even fewer grape plants than humans, even if both need to be stabilized.

    4. Knot Galt

      Desalination may not be cost effective but many nations have started using them nonetheless, especially in the Middle East. What the article does not mention is the hidden cost and energy use of all the Data Centers currently online and being built. To maintain traffic and keep the Hi-Tech boom going, these centers are a huge expense that can only be justified by the growth of the industry that advertising and capitalism have sponsored. Not only that, but the carbon footprint of these monsters will only hasten our destruction!

      I am waiting for the election hubris to subside before raising the alarm about climate change again. Silicon Valley will be building a desalination plant of it’s own in the not too distant future and it will be the utmost hypocrisy of the current status quo, not to mention their nature, to request Fed and State funding to get it so that the Economy can be saved!

    5. Oregoncharles

      Solar distillation. Sizeable construction costs, minimal operating cost.

      None of this matters if you don’t have enough water, and they can’t have the Columbia until we’re through with it.

  21. Blurtman

    Why does everyone suddenly need a safe space?

    “But there are some areas that the federal government should not leave and should address and address strongly. One of these areas is the problem of illegal immigration. After years of neglect, this administration has taken a strong stand to stiffen the protection of our borders. We are increasing border controls by 50 percent. We are increasing inspections to prevent the hiring of illegal immigrants. And tonight, I announce I will sign an executive order to deny federal contracts to businesses that hire illegal immigrants.

    Let me be very clear about this: We are still a nation of immigrants; we should be proud of it. We should honor every legal immigrant here, working hard to become a new citizen. But we are also a nation of laws.”

    – Bill Clinton, 1996 State of the Union address.

    1. Arizona Slim

      Truth be told, when Clinton was POTUS, I made a point to tune in to NPR for his State of the Union speeches. I didn’t agree with everything he said, but, occasionally, there were gems like this one.

      And the guy could make a speech. Gotta give him that.

      1. Waldenpond

        This has been an enlightening election… on a national level and regional. I’m clearly not a liberal, not a progressive and the democratic socialists would clearly kick me out of their party (as the Ds have done) as I am not an open borders supporter.

        I think large populations are ungovernable and support the concept of borders and nations. I find the economic and political warfare that creates forced immigration repugnant. The impacts on forced immigration is not just to the society that is destroyed but to the society they are forced to enter (just the impact on local infrastructure can be a huge challenge, and the anger created when the cultures and norms are too different too quickly)

        We are a nation of immigrants….. hmmm, can’t help but think of the Native Americans when I hear that term.

        1. Oregoncharles

          20,000 years ago.
          “First Nations” is a very precise term.

          Of course, all humans outside Africa are descended from migrants.

  22. voteforno6

    Re: Trump Ascends to the Cherry Blossom Throne

    Donald Trump took out the Bush and Clinton dynasties, which was not an insignificant accomplishment (and may prove to be his greatest feat, for many reasons), but I wonder if the author of that article is perhaps granting him more power than he actually has. He is still very unpopular, and I have the sense that his support is soft at the edges. He can strengthen that by delivering to voters. Will he? If he cozies up to the Republican establishment, I’m not so sure. If (more likely when) the sh*t hits the fan again, they will be held responsible.

    Still, Trump may prove to be what Stalin (in a different context) referred to as the Icebreaker of the Revolution. In the process of taking out the Bush and Clinton machines, he has demonstrated just how weak the establishment is. As the saying goes, there’s power out there in the streets, and someone just needs to pick it up. I am cautiously optimistic that some in the Democratic Party are starting to recognize this – they seem to be coalescing around selecting Keith Ellison as the next DNC chair, which is definitely a step in the right direction. The Democrats may also not be in as bad a position as many think. With Clintonism so thoroughly repudiated (they did, after all, lost an election to Donald Trump), there’s now a vacuum in the party, which allows them greater flexibility to respond to this anti-establishment fervor. The Republicans, being so thoroughly in control around the country, will be in a position of both defending and attacking that establishment (that’s Trump’s appeal, after all). They just might crack apart under the strain.

  23. lyman alpha blob

    RIP Leonard

    At the risk of giving a homework assignment, maybe a little video embed of Cohen would be nice later?

    In the mean time (and they do seem pretty mean right now):

    Everybody knows that the dice are loaded
    Everybody rolls with their fingers crossed
    Everybody knows the war is over
    Everybody knows the good guys lost
    Everybody knows the fight was fixed
    The poor stay poor, the rich get rich
    That’s how it goes
    Everybody knows

    Everybody knows that the boat is leaking
    Everybody knows that the captain lied
    Everybody got this broken feeling
    Like their father or their dog just died
    Everybody talking to their pockets
    Everybody wants a box of chocolates
    And a long-stem rose
    Everybody knows

    Leonard Cohen – Everybody Knows

    1. David

      Can we have a collective moment of silence for Leonard Cohen, probably the greatest and certainly the most intelligent songwriter of the modern era? I grew up with him and bought all of his albums from Songs of Love and Hate onwards as soon as they came out. Rotten luck for his passing to be overshadowed by the Clinton kamikaze episode.
      The BBC article isn’t much good I’m afraid. Go here for an outstanding recent article about his new (and last) disk and his life.

    2. kgw

      I remember reading LC remembering his practicing with Joshu Sasaki Roshi at Mt. Baldy Zen Center…

      After wondering what a Jew was doing in this “camp” environment, he recalled a remark by Sasaki Roshi, to the effect of: Leonard, you are as much of a Jew as I am a Japanese…

  24. fresno dan

    Syria Analysis: Obama Declares Fight is With “Terrorists” Rather Than Assad EA WorldView. Resilc: “We are fighting our own funded people?”

    I have mentioned this before, but it is such a great parable I never get tired of repeating it.
    In the movie by Woody Allen, “Bananas” Allen plays his typical neurotic character, who through a series of misadventures ends up as a US paratrooper being dropped into some south American country undergoing revolution. Allen, nervously sitting there (just the visual of him in a combat helmet is hilarious) asks his grizzled sergeant whether they will be fighting for the government, or against the government, and the sergeant replies that because of past failures, to assure success this time, half will be fighting FOR the government, and half will be fighting AGAINST the government.

    the more things change, the more things stay the same…

  25. Paid Minion

    Interesting info about Mosul.

    Armored troops fighting on foot? Implies that the government doesn’t have enough infantrymen that they consider reliable.

    As always, fighting a force in a city dressed/looking the same as civilians always leads to high casualties among the civilians. Among the troops, it will lead to a policy of shooting anyone approaching your person or vehicle. Anyone squeamish about implementing the policy will eventually be blown up, with everyone around them.

    Otherwise, not much new here. See Iwo Jima and Okinawa for digging die hards out of holes/tunnels. See Aachen for urban fighting.

    Or you could just lay siege to the place, and limit your actions to rescuing the civilians you can. Another one of those “we had to destroy the place to save it” deals.

    “…….I guess they would rather be alive, than be “free”…. “

  26. Cripes

    At the Donald’s white house meeting yesterday, did anyone notice his deer in-the-headlights face and submissive posture? He looked like a schoolboy at detention. Maybe it’s finally sinking in that this president thing is actually happening.

  27. fresno dan

    Donald Trump Ran on Protecting Social Security But Transition Team Includes Privatizers/ Intercept (martha r). Looks like the answer as to whether Trump was getting rolled by the Republican establishment is coming pretty quickly. Remember that Trump doesn’t owe Wall Street anything; this appears to be the result of turning to Republican “experts”.

    extremely disappointing.
    New boss same as the old boss

    But I can’t say I’m surprised.

    1. Tom

      Yeah, I’m cycling through the five stages pretty quickly myself, but let me try this …

      Trump has said all along as President he’s going to find the best people. Fair enough. He’s done the same thing in his businesses. He builds skyscrapers, but he is not an engineer or an architect. He is the vision guy, the financer, the marketer, the deal maker.

      Okay, so now President-elect Trump bandies about the names of four SSA veterans who are in the privatizer camp. It’s scary that all four share simliar views on SS, but at least they are people who know the program inside out. I know the conventional wisdom is that personnel is policy, but there hasn’t been much that is conventional about this election. It’s not out of the realm of possibilities that Trump will once again zig when we all thought he would zag.

      So is Trump suddenly going to kowtow to these experts’ personal views just because they have more specialized knowledge on this particular subject? That’s still to be determined but my hope is that he will listen to whoever gets the nod, assess the different options and then do what he really wants to do. If that involves any hint of privatizing SS, then we are well and truly f*cked and once again hope and change turns to hype and charges.

      And if it turns out Trump really pulls a massive bait and switch, I gotta believe payback will be a bitch.

      1. MyLessThanPrimeBeef

        Well, it doesn’t sound good, but as you say, we will have to wait and see.

        Sometimes, to stop hacking, you have to hire the best and brightest hackers, when they are still young.

        Actually, many times, not just sometimes.

      1. witters

        As someone outside the US, can you show me the enthusiasm and effectivenss of the Democrats in pushing for serious and genuinely redistributive progressive personal and company tax? Was it something BC did? Obama? Carter? FDR? And if the latter, then why is not doing it simply typically republican rather than just typical?

  28. Alex morfesis

    That was fast…pres. Elect karrottop and his not ready for kryme slyme players look to be doing the teapot dome shuffle…

    gov christie and eye of nyeut gain-grinch have both told media the donald in front of the cameras was just an act…

    he wont build a wall and he was just kidding about that birther thingee…

    Repubz wont be able to deliver jay oh beez before the election cycle kicks back in for 2018…and will be thrown out across the board…

    The purge continues…

    telemachos…better get some more arrows ready…

    1. fresno dan

      November 11, 2016 at 10:34 am

      Some interesting stuff:

      “Recent headlines, like Brexit and Trump, have been dominated by stories that require us to trace intangible butterfly effects to fully understand. For example, one of the triggers of the Arab Spring that exploded in early 2011 was the spike in food prices in Egypt and Tunisia. The countries’ main source of wheat imports was Russia, where a drought six months earlier forced Moscow to ban exports for the first time ever. (America’s ethanol-subsidies and global-commodities market speculation also played key roles, not to mention the countries themselves crossing the tipping point of intolerable political and social stagnation.)”

  29. Leigh

    One thing I learned while working briefly in finance is: emotions and intelligent decision making are mutually exclusive.

    Got me thinking about this election.

    This election was based solely on emotions. High-school level, sophomoric politics.
    The politicians played it that way – staying focused on personalities and as opposed to positions on issues.
    The media ate it up.
    The electorate ate it up.

    How often did we see substantive policy discussions?
    I only recall Sanders wanting to go down that path.
    But that’s hard work and it doesn’t play to good ratings and it doesn’t rouse the electorate the way seeing
    grown men discuss penis-size on national television while vying for the highest office in the world – THAT is a ratings grabber.

    1. Foy

      You are right Leigh. But you might want to have a read of Scot Adams’ blog where he has been talking about this exact issue since the middle of last year. When looking to influence and persuade people identity arguments beat analogies, analogy beats reason and reason usually only defeat other ‘poorer’ reason. It’s because emotions are what ultimately drive decision making. It’s sad but true. We are irrational human beings. If you try to get into detailed rational arguments, especially with a large group like an electorate, unfortunately you are going to lose to arguments that involve analogy and identity. Look at all the cognitive dissonance going on now that shows people can’t understand the reality that has happened and are ignoring the true reasons behind it. DNC party elders are a case in point.

      Trump only used identity plays (eg Make America Great Again), some analogies, and linguistic kill shots which wiped out his opponents – remember ‘low energy Bush’? Bush could never escape that and it did him in.

      If you’re interested here are some links to Adams blog from earlier in the year and late last year about influence and persuasion.

  30. TsWkr

    From the DNC Staffer screams at Brazile HuffPo article, I thought the last sentence of this paragraph was pretty telling of how seriously the dems actually take climate change:

    Neither of the DNC staffers who spoke to HuffPost knew Zach’s last name, or much about him. They noted that he wasn’t alone in his sentiments. Some in the room nodded as he spoke, they said, and after he left, some talked about him being right on some points (perhaps not his claims about imminent death by climate change).

    Perhaps not!

    1. rd

      The Rust Belt voters that swung over to Trump largely live in the interior of the mid-Atlantic and in the upper Midwest. There is a good chance that global warming will lead to climate change in these areas that will actually improve their local climate. Even in Florida, many of the Trump voters live on the high ground because they can’t afford the beach front properties that are going to get taken out by rising sea levels. Heck, their homes might now become closer to the beach and their property values would go up.

      Keep in mind that the industries left their communities to go to the South where you need air conditioning most of the year and drought is likely to be a serious issue. There is a good chance that global warming will drive some of these industries back to the Rust Belt because those areas were developed two centuries ago around a temperate climate, fertile soils, and lots of water (ground water and surface water).

      The Trump voters north of the Mason-Dixon line don’t see any reason to be concerned about climate change. On a local, personal basis they are probably right.

      1. TsWkr

        While I don’t disagree that many rust belters have that line of thinking, I’m a believer that local climate is less important in an interconnected economy with complex distribution systems. A changing climate will be very disruptive in the upper Midwest even with a longer growing season.

        The gentleman described in the HuffPo article wasn’t really making the case that the Dems should have pushed climate change policy more, but rather “you screwed this up by hand-picking a flawed candidate and now we’re going to burn faster.” I don’t think HRC would have made much if any progress on climate change, but it’s the one area that concerns me much more w/Trump and made me consider a LOTE vote.

        1. rd

          I am actually very concerned overall about climate change: primarily ocean acidification; and methane clathrates going into solution/gaseous phases. Those are Permian extinction types of events.

          Sea levels rose 400 feet in the past 20,000 years as the ice sheets melted and the ecosystem did fine. I am a civil engineer and the problem is that we have put in a lot of expensive fixed infrastructure into places with no resilience, so coastal cities can be wiped out. That isn’t an ecosystem issue but it is a major economic issue. It is largely controlled by local zoning regulations at the county level.

          We allow a lot of agricultural runoff and urban sewage to pollute estuaries and coastal areas. This is a major ecosystem issue that reduces the resilience of those communities and makes them susceptible to climate change. It has started to hit home in the Midwest and Southeast with the toxic algae blooms and incidents like the West Virginia chemical release and the coal ash impoundment breaches. these areas are starting to take some actions.

          We have turned massive swathes of the country into monocultures of corn, soy beans, and suburban lawns. That also reduces biodiversity and resiliency and puts huge barriers in place to prevent migration of species impacted by climate change.

          The environmental issues associated with climate change are far bigger than just greenhouse gas emissions. We can add a huge amount of resilience to our systems by specific actions on a local basis. We don’t have to wait for the federal government for at least half of the solutions. The simplistic focus on greenhouse gases has actually been detrimental to the cause because it immediately takes on sectors that provide employment to many people without incorporating it into a holistic systems-wide issue.

          1. skippy

            Just imagine from an engineering perspective the mitigation required for all the stored potential in fixed assets, waiting to be incorporated into the water system and the ramifications of it.

            Disheveled Marsupial…. say the time and expense of decommissioning a cape size vessel manifold….

          2. pretzelattack

            since greenhouse gases are causing the climate to change, and since it is happening faster than predicted initially, focusing on them hardly seems simplistic.

            sea level rise over 20000 years is a lot easier for an ecosystem to cope with than over a few hundred years, much less our civilization.

            1. rd

              It’s like dealing with the financial system. If you simply focus on fighting deregulation etc. and do nothing to focus on your own personal finances to have a resilient situation, then you are simply at the mercy of whatever happens. If there is more focus on local impacts, then it may be possible to get more people engaged in understanding the bigger picture as well as improving the local resilience. “All politics is local.”

    2. Arizona Slim

      Screaming at Brazile? Cool!

      Wanna know what I did yesterday? I had a meeting across town, and my route when right by the local Clinton campaign HQ. (During the primary season, it had been Bernie’s HQ.)

      Well, there I was at 6th Street and Campbell Avenue in Tucson, Arizona. Holding my bicycle and waiting for the light to change so I could walk the bike to quieter side streets and continue on my way.

      There was the headquarters.

      And I let loose a tirade. Oh, did I ever. To the Hillary sign in the window, I hollered, “How d’ya like her NOW?” To the dark and empty office I yelled, “Ya coulda had BERNIE!”

      I said a few other things that can’t be repeated on NC, but you get the idea.

      Dang, that felt good!

      1. Jim Haygood

        Well, I’m standin’ on a corner in Tucson Arizona
        Such a fine sight to see
        It’s ol’ Slim, my lord, in full-throated roar
        Yellin’ “Ya’ll coulda had BERNIE!”

      2. Paid Minion

        This is what I’ve always liked about A.S………..

        The not always repressed anger. LOL

        The internal struggles she must have between her leaning liberal tendancies, vs. the stupid crap she sees from those she encounters daily (usually with her neighbors and customers).

        Torn in different directions by liberal claims that “poverty makes poor people the way they are”, vs. conservative dogma stating “it’s their own fault”; and realizing that both are partially right.

        Am I (at least) close in my evaluation? :)

  31. fresno dan

    Hillary Clinton’s Celebrity Feminism Was a Failure New Republic (Steve C)

    I think my reply to RabidGandhi
    November 11, 2016 at 7:26 am
    was so fitting about what is needed in voters to get them behind Hillary, I think I’ll try it with feminists as well, albeit with a few slight modifications

    If only we had a better, smarter, more diverse feminists….Oh yeah, and richer. and better looking. and younger too. and one last thing: THINNER – one can never be too thin…
    and one final, final thing – much more stylish. I go to Europe and I am just embarrassed by those feminists at the conferences.
    and buxom.

    1. nycTerrierist

      I called it ‘trickle-down feminism’.


      as scary a prospect as Pres. Trump, I am glad to see much less of the Clintons —
      unless they’re at a RICO trial for their Foundation.

      1. George B.

        I just saw a item in the NY Post saying that they’re already grooming Chelsea to run for Nita Lowey’s seat in congress after Lowey retires. Resistance is futile!

      2. Jim Haygood

        trickle-down feminism

        As cash flow dries up at the Clinton Foundation, Hillary contemplates auctioning her Shewee at Sotheby’s.

      3. Waldenpond

        I go with white feminism. Very identitarian and hierarchy laden. Seems to run under some secret code I don’t get but seems to be headed by white males then followed by white women. There’s a ebbing and waning hierarchy (status determined by wealth, celebrity, disadvantaged group) on who is allowed to discuss white women and in what terms (language policing) and while women are allowed to chastise (see: twitter dogpiling) someone who breaks the hierarchy, it’s up to the white men to enforce it.

    2. RabidGandhi

      Definitely a comment worth repeating, Dan, had me LOLing.

      Yesterday I read someone saying that HRC “would have had a cabinet that looks like America” at which point I imagined a Chief of Staff working two other jobs to pay off her student loans, a Secretary of State who sold his bodily liquids to pay for his Oxycontin-induced heroin habit, a Secretary of Defence who lives in a trailer after being wrongfully evicted by Goldman Sachs, and an Attorney General who was about to be deported even though he’s been here since age 6.

      1. HBE

        Hilarious, but it also sadly sums up the lives of 90% of this country.

        Debt Laden, suffering, hopeless, excluded, exploited and looking for an escape, while hoping for a change.

        While being told over and over again that their suffering is no one’s fault but their own, while being stomped on by those who crawled over their bodies to gain a better vantage point to spot additional opportunities to exploit even more to add to the mountain of bodies neoliberalism has created.

      2. fresno dan

        November 11, 2016 at 11:53 am

        PERFECT – except I would have said “precious bodily fluids…”

      3. MyLessThanPrimeBeef

        Totally agree.

        Also, close to 50% will be deplorables.

        And she will take out a mortgage from Wells Fargo to pay for her bedroom in the White House.

  32. Patricia

    FWIW, since I’ve been going on about my daughter’s friends, three of them are coming around, voicing incredulity at the current protests. Daughter says they could be protesting the many things wrong with our electoral process but instead they are burning Trump effigies which, if done to Obama in ’08, would have made them go nuts. “As bad as the worst of the Trumpers,” shaking her head.

    She is attending a local Dapl protest this afternoon.

  33. Patricia

    Some of the lyrics from Leonard Cohen’s last album:

    You Want It Darker

    They’re lining up the prisoners
    And the guards are taking aim
    I struggled with some demons
    They were middle class and tame
    I didn’t know I had permission to murder and to maim
    You want it darker

    Hineni, hineni
    I’m ready, my lord

    If you are the dealer, let me out of the game
    If you are the healer, I’m broken and lame
    If thine is the glory, mine must be the shame
    You want it darker

    Hineni, hineni
    Hineni, hineni
    I’m ready, my lord

  34. yan

    I was wondering the same thing re:Silicon Valley Secession. What is their plan regarding water? Are they planning to crowdfund water deliveries? Most of the water they use in the south comes from out of state and the San Joaquin river watershed cannot by any means maintain all of the population or ag activity…
    Desalination is not an option for agriculture either…
    These people truly live in some kind of metaverse.

  35. Rahul Menon

    Few thoughts:

    1) The silent vote has gone for Trump. They didn’t show support for Trump fearing backlash.

    2) Relaxed Mood: When media, polls are showing that Hillary is winning by 98% or so. I think she might not need my vote. I might as well watch some videos on FB, text on Instagram

    3) Trump voters were really pissed to a point they were not letting go. They had time they had the motivation to show Hollywood, bankers, singers that they are heard.

    4) Clinton played the Russia,Women, Equality cards way too much. She over used to a point when facts say something else. Example of 17 agencies telling about a russia hack when wikileaks said it was false

    5) Clinton lost appeal to a common, poor working class hanging out with these happy looking rich.

    6) Replay the debates again. High school kid will figure out that Clinton didn’t provide straight answers. For every question she turned around and said Trump this, Trump that. There was never an answer.

    7) Emails – Any person who has worked a year or two with computers and emails in the corporate world know not to use your personal emails. Instead you kept using it for 8 yrs and trashed the server.

    8) Anthony Weiner, Donna Brazile, Podesta — People around you matter. Bad things catch up to you.

    9) Clinton Foundation – Why was she asking the middle east for donations in millions over a period of 10 yrs in installments and so forth. This is messed up. You can’t shelter the people who are against your principles that you were preaching women in the USA.

    Lots of things…. I don’t feel like typing any more ..

  36. fresno dan

    According to the National Archives, there have been more proposed constitutional amendments to change the Electoral College than any other topic (700 proposals in Congress in the last 200 years!). Gallup reports that only about a third of Americans support keeping the institution. And with Hillary Clinton possibly having won the popular vote on Tuesday despite losing to Donald Trump in the Electoral College, Democrats may begin to push for change again. So why is this still the system we have?

    Part of the answer is that it’s very difficult to amend the Constitution, requiring an organized, concerted effort to keep the proposed change on the agenda in Congress. The amendment process requires even more than that, though; after a proposed amendment passes in Congress, it has to be approved by three-fourths of the states. (There’s an alternate path to amending the Constitution, but it’s even more arcane.) And enough states are made more influential in the Electoral College that they wouldn’t be on board with a constitutional change.

    things don’t change…until they do

    1. bob

      It could be a great way for a minority congress to push a popular issue, and claim some sort of moral high ground.

      Even the prez elect railed against “crooked” voting. Fix it.

      Popular vote, with paper. Very simple. Will it ever be allowed? I doubt it. “democracy” in action.

      1. bob

        Why not try that in the lame duck session, or is that just reserved for the betters to shove through tax breaks and trade deals?

        Talk about a legacy. But, who is worried about that? Prez needs a jet.

  37. Ted

    2008 Votes for BO 69.5 million. JM 59.9 million

    2016 Votes for HRC 60.3 million DT 59.9 million

    With the population increase over the last 10 years, there are about 10 million fewer voted for these two — nearly all on the Dem. side. The Dem Base of 2008 really did not show up, leaving the door open for Trump supporters. This election was about being despirited on the left.

    1. John k

      Really good point.
      Dnc, wielding whips and clubs, purified the party by driving out the 10 million deplorables.

    2. MyLessThanPrimeBeef

      Unless they wake up, those missing 10 million voters might end up voting in the next election…voting for the other side.

  38. timbers

    MoonofAlabama says Obama terminated US support of the head chopping terrorists in Syria the day Trump met him in the WH, but would have continued had Clinton won. Obama may have been stung by Trump bringing this up obliquely in the debates and what’s to cover his arse. BTW this is good news which besides saving lives will descalate tensions with Russia who was destroying Obama’s terrorists. There are a lot of negative abt Trump he’s not our guy but there ARE likely to be significant areas of improvement with Trump vs Clinton/Obama. This is one. Hoping end of TPP is another and MAYBE changes to NAFTA. If that happens my expectations will have been met anything else is bonus.

    1. craazyboy

      I think Trump will have won his first [non]war before even being sworn in. His ally Putin is about to do mop up right now. That’s way better than having a VP like Biden. You end up losing two wars that way.

        1. Plenue

          Syria will probably (hopefully) wind down. But given Pence’s history, Iran itself may be the next flashpoint. It really comes down to whether Trump is going to be his usual stubborn, egotistic self, or will delegate authority to ‘advisers’. People criticize Trump for never listening to other people, but here that would be a very good thing, given the utter madmen he’s picking. I’m hoping that upon being given intelligence briefings and discover that Iran doesn’t have and, probably never did have, a nuclear weapons program in any way, shape, or form, he’ll decide they aren’t worth starting a war over.

          1. craazyboy

            What I’ve heard from people in the casino biz is that Trump’s “The Apprentice” persona is not far off from his real biz persona. Everyone delegates, you have to, and even more so as a prez. But he is very much in the face of his underlings, so I doubt they will have free reign. I would be more concerned about Trump being fed misinformation, incomplete information, or the DeeCee intellectually captured folks quote rhyme and verse. I also worry we find out finally for sure The Donald may be a right wing kookie wingnut.

          2. knowbuddhau

            Those briefings won’t be conducted by emissaries from Vulcan. They’ll be conducted by people representing institutions with their own agendas.

            Someone above or in Water Cooler mentioned that, at his White House meeting, Trump looked like a schoolboy in detention. I’d say he looked like a pilgrim visiting hallowed ground. There’s a deep conflation of the state with the sacred among many Americans. It’s at the heart of American Exceptionalism, Manifest Destiny, and all that crap. Trump probably thought he was visiting the American Vatican. And he gets to be the new High Priest.

            I expect the various powers behind the throne to try to take full advantage of Trump’s inexperience and naivete, as in this warning from 8 years ago. Who’s really in charge of the empire, anyway?

            President-elect’s Queries to Briefers
            Ray McGovern,
            November 7, 2008:

            Aware that I helped prepare the President’s Daily Brief for Presidents Nixon and Ford, and that I conducted one-on-one PDB briefings of Reagan’s most senior advisers during the latter’s administration, Caddell wanted me to tape a telephone interview to run on his show this weekend.

            He asked what I would tell President-elect Barack Obama if I were Mike Morell, the chief CIA analyst assigned to brief Obama daily.

            What fun, I thought. On more sober reflection, it seemed more useful to prepare questions of the kind President-elect Obama might wish to ask Morell, since the briefings are supposed to be a two-way street.

            Obama is no shrinking violet. Just the same, it may be useful to warn him not to succumb to the particular brand of “shock and awe” that can be induced by ostensibly sexy intelligence to color reactions of briefees, including presidents. I have seen it happen.

      1. timbers

        I agree but add that Putin appears to be delaying the assault on Allepo and for good reason, that being if Obama ends support to the terrorists the they can be gotten rid of more slowly but with less death and damage then a full on Russian attack. If so Kudos to the Russians for placing civilian life and common sense ahead of shock and awe.

  39. Andrew Watts

    D’oh! I walked into that one, didn’t I? A handful of them are currently rioting in my old formerly industrial and now gentrified neighborhood in Portland, Oregon.

    SOMEBODY CALL THE FBI! HIPSTER RIOT! Merry Christmas to everybody in the Portland office of the FBI. It’s what they’ve always wanted.


    1. Andrew Watts

      This was a response to polecat further up. I suppose it also applies to the story about rioting in Portland but if you ignore the hipsters they usually go away.

    2. Andrew Watts

      Aww, too late! Red Team handled it.

      Police said several in the crowd of 30 to 40 protesters chased the man, 27-year-old Christopher Joseph Gourneau, and knocked him down, kicked and assaulted him. State police troopers and police intervened and aided Gourneau, who didn’t suffer serious injuries.

      He was jailed on suspicion of cocaine possession and possession of a destructive device charges, police said. He was released from jail on his own recognizance Thursday, jail records show. –Oregonian

      The one time it’s permissible to rough up a cop during a protest.

  40. OIFVet

    Moscow links dominate Moldovan presidential poll.

    But if [Moldova’s] Mr Dodon and [Bulgaria’s] Mr Radev both win Sunday’s run-off ballots, their presidencies could still set off alarm bells in Brussels amid a growing revolt against EU values in eastern Europe. That includes Viktor Orban, Hungary’s prime minister, and Milos Zeman, the Czech president, who have called for warmer relations with Moscow.

    Eastern Europe and Trump are likely to upturn the neocons’ Cold War against Russia, and I think that this is something we should be thankful for. Aside from FT’s screeching about “EU values,” Eastern Europeans are far more concerned about the economic hits that they have taken due to the West’s anti-Russian sanctions, and the migrant crisis that they received in return for their support of the West’s policies. The latter is not the issue in Moldova’s election, but it looms very large in Bulgaria, where Germany’s about-face on its open welcome of migrants, and recent EU funds influx to build migrant camps and schools, has led to well-founded fears that Bulgaria has been slated to become Europe’s ‘Sacrifice Zone’ (to borrow a term from Chris Hedges), as many of those migrants entered the EU through Bulgaria and would thus be returned to Bulgaria from Germany and the rest of Northern Europe. This accounts for the candidate of the combined patriotic parties and organisations (who won 15% of the vote in the first round of the election) endorsement of General Radev for the run-off this coming Sunday, over the candidate of his ruling coalition partner. The government has had a series of foreign policy debacles in the past couple of months (such as the embarrassing debacle at the UN GenSec election), where it was rightly seen as having sold sovereignty for a pat on the back and a kick in the rear, so Radev’s pledge to stand up for the national sovereignty and dignity as partner rather than a puppet within NATO and EU is playing very well with a population that is beaten down and very scared.

    If Trump truly wants to change the US foreign policy course, he would do well to reach out to Eastern Europe as soon as possible, and engage them as partners rather than as puppets. Those times are coming to an end, whether the proponents of Empire like it or not.

    1. Andrew Watts

      The New Democrats probably think they can co-opt the Berniecrats. We’ll see about that. I, for one, want to purge the Democratic Party of the neoliberals. The bleeding will continue until people like Warren are the party’s sane right-wing, Bernie and his fellow social democrats are the moderate center, and ideological (secular/religious) socialists are the party’s left wing.

      Always kick a person while they’re down. They might get up.

    1. Waldenpond

      Well lookie there. Clintonism isn’t dead after all. Nice little shiny lesser-evil object Chelsea makes.

    2. Quentin

      Save me! The Clinton family is just a perpetually mutating virus that sucks up money. I thought that the heart of this zombie dynasty had at last been pierced with a stake and permanently destroyed. And now I have to read this bullshit. Save me, please. No one is listening. No one can drain the political cesspool, not even Donald Trump who, in fact, now bathes in it all day, every day. The NY section of the miasma is especially disgusting. That’s what the midwesterner Hillary Clinton owes her fame and renown to: the NY political machine (Chuck Schumer, anyone?).

    3. OIFVet

      And then there is the Michelle 2020 crowd. Liberals not only are out of fresh ideas, but are modern day royalists to boot.

      1. NotTimothyGeithner

        This is bourgeois hallmark, copying the forms but not the substance of the nobility. Inherited rule was largely designed to allow for peaceful transition and continuance of government, even if the kid was a dope. War would be much worse for everyone. Now we can pretend to be Disney royals. There aren’t many calls for Sasha and Malia to be drone mechanics. Interestingly enough, actual royals, William and Harry, joined the army. For William, it was basically camp, but Harry is (was?) a real soldier.

    4. bob

      The Bolsheviks were onto something. You don’t have to agree with them, but you have to admire the resolve, and results. Even in 21st century ‘merica, we can’t compete.

      1. MyLessThanPrimeBeef

        Circuses too good here today.

        What was there to do in Russia in 1919, if you were not fighting the Boche?

    5. Liberal Mole

      Disgusting! I’m in crooked vote suppressing Lowey’s district. She’ll have to move here and I’ll have to move if they put that spawn in here.

  41. Waldenpond

    Why do I have no interest in the direction the response to the election is going? I am just frustrated. I watched the Rs create pacs and lobby groups etc and looks like blocks of Ds are doing the same.

    Brandnewcongress looks like nothing but a rebranding op of the more and better Ds from the old blogger boy days (who should be ignored forever after getting Trump elected). Ourrevolution is a dark money lobby group formed just after an election where the D candidate was chastised for financial shenanigans through a scam foundation and through the DNC. The R electeds are chastised for the grifting and mocked for using for pacs/lobbies for payoffs and R voters are mocked for getting suckered over and over. The D solution to the DNC shenanigans is more lobbying and grifting.

    1. Arizona Slim

      What bothers me about BNC can be crystalized in their latest e-mailing. They’re trying to recruit people to run for Congress. But, if you’re a white person in a district that is predominantly of color, they don’t want you.

      Sheesh. How short-sighted.

      One of my friends, who would make a fine elected representative, is white. He is married to an African American woman, an artist, who, IMHO, should stick to art.

      Looks like my friend would be SOL in terms of BNC support.

      And then there’s another friend. Businessman with an excellent head on his shoulders. Married to a woman who came here from Mexico. And when she arrived in the US, she knew one word of English.

      But, oops, he’s a Republican and so is she. So, no BNC for them.

      1. oho

        in case you missed it…..your white friend isn’t “POC”

        the Democratic Party literally uses quotas…while in theory isn’t necessarily bad, can just as easily be used to ‘keep down’ minority faces—see elite colleges with Asians/Jews

        12 positions: >>> >>> 4 POC (2 Black; 1 Asian; 1 Hispanic) >>> >>> 4 Women (assuming COO is a white woman) >>> >>> 6 White Men >>> >>> >>> >>> 33% diverse >>> >>> 33% women >>> >>> 50% white menails/emailid/2507

      2. Waldenpond

        Yep, it’s fracturing into the liberals forming outside groups while the progressives are forming outside groups. It still equates to funneling the same policies into a lib-dem D party. There is no room for those to the left.

        Yes, I noticed the R thing too. BNC/OR initially claimed they would support based on policy not party and then quickly excluded Rs and were promoting pro-life Ds. Go figure. So no BNC/OR for me.

        I’d be interested in what the policy proscription of your R friends are in this case. Rs typically give primacy to capitalism/corporations and that didn’t seem too popular this election with the negative attitudes towards outsourcing and TPP.

  42. Buttinsky

    In a replay of the long vote count following June’s primary, almost a third of California ballots (over 4 million) remain “unprocessed” as of yesterday afternoon. Those uncounted votes, of course, will not affect the result of the presidential vote, but they could determine the final verdict on such statewide measures as repealing the death penalty (currently trailing by about 600,000 votes).

    In San Francisco there were still 100,000 unprocessed ballots, which may yet flip the results of several local measures, and the race for state senate, presently being led by “New Democrat” Scott Wiener over progressive Jane Kim (down by 13,000 votes).

    1. JSM

      Who is it who ‘knows’ the unknowable – that those uncounted votes ‘will not affect the result of the presidential vote?’ Are we to assume that the assignment of provisional ballots didn’t just happen to target a particular class of voters, as it did in the primary?

      1. Buttinsky

        I don’t for one second discount the possibility of perfidy in the election, but if, as you suggest, the provisional ballots were a way of segregating people who weren’t voting the “right” way, all the more reason to think that the state’s vote-counters will not allow them to alter the already decided outcome now. As in June.

      2. jrs

        I think they can’t affect the Presidential vote because didn’t Hillary already get all of California’s electoral votes?

        1. Buttinsky

          Well, the electors who technically vote for the president don’t vote until December — after the popular vote has determined which candidate’s electors (55 here in California) will participate in that Electoral College vote. So the popular vote has to be counted first. Last I looked, Clinton was up something like 5.5 million to Trump’s 3 million. Trump would have to take an improbably high percentage of the 4-million-plus unprocessed ballots to change the outcome.

          Across June and July, Sanders did slowly make up considerable ground on Clinton in the primary, but that was much closer than the Clinton-Trump spread.

          As alluded to above, all of this sort of presupposes that votes and genuine vote counting constitute the determining process. Maybe they don’t.

  43. aletheia33

    a friend just sent me this petition, sponsored by avaaz, with an invitation to sign:

    The unimaginable has happened. President Trump. Add your voice to the open letter below to make it a manifesto for the next 4 years — then spread it far and wide:
    Dear Mr. Trump,
    This is not what greatness looks like.
    The world rejects your fear, hate-mongering, and bigotry. We reject your support for torture, your calls for murdering civilians, and your general encouragement of violence. We reject your denigration of women, Muslims, Mexicans, and millions of others who don’t look like you, talk like you, or pray to the same god as you.
    Facing your fear we choose compassion. Hearing your despair we choose hope. Seeing your ignorance we choose understanding.
    As citizens of the world, we stand united against your brand of division.
    [Add your name!]

    this is how i answered her request:

    “i can only sign something like this that also names the way the democrat neoliberals have used the media to cynically manipulate vulnerable populations through their fear of victimization by white bigotry. and the way the media have cravenly lined up for the opportunity to be used in this way.

    “the democratic party establishment’s utter failure to make any attempt to bring everyone in, to foster mutual respect, understanding, and tolerance between people with differing struggles, its complete abandonment of the working class, and its demonizing of both sanders and trump (which amounts to throwing its own share of gasoline on the most dangerous fire smouldering in our society) has massively contributed to the present social danger, and until i see that acknowledged by organizations on the left, i’m not signing any of their ‘trump is the enemy’ petititons.

    demonizing the millions of people who have lost literally everything, some of whom–many of them due to cynical manipulation by the right–blame those of different color, sexual preference, etc. for that loss, only worsens the situation overall. i think it is time for people who consider themselves enlightened to take the trouble to fully inform themselves about everyone who voted for trump and why they did and try to think of how to address the fact that a great many of them are fellow human beings who have also been massively victimized.”

    and i would add here at NC, while i have the floor: we (i don’t mean NC readers here) may think they should stop believing fox news. well, taking responsibility today also means taking the trouble to seek out better information than the propaganda pumped out by the establishment “liberal” media–npr, the new york times, etc., who in their pathetic loyalty to the democratic establishment destroyed the sanders campaign, hugely misrepresented HRC’s electability, and in doing so forfeited any right to claim that they practice objective or responsible journalism.

    few who consider themselves enlightened will take the trouble to so inform themselves, and that is more shame to them than it is to the white unemployed who do not question fox news, because they have been to college and presumably gained there the critical thinking skills to notice when a supposedly liberal establishment morphs into an active destroyer of everyone who is not part of it.

    1. RabidGandhi

      Yeah they really need to modify that to

      We reject your support for torture (not including Dems force-feeding prisoners at Guantanamo or Solitary Confinement of Dem enemies like Chelsea Manning), your calls for murdering civilians (Unless they’re on Obama’s disposition matrix), and your general encouragement of violence (not including the 7 countries Obama is bombing… Oh and any other ones Dems might want to bomb later). We reject your denigration of (rich white) women, Muslims (again, provided no disposition matrix), Mexicans (except for the record number deported by Obama– he’s so dreamy!), and millions of (non-deplorable basket) others who don’t look like you, talk like you, or pray to the same god as you (even though you don’t seem to be very religious, but whatever).

      Facing your fear we choose compassion (for Bankers and Bush-era torturers). Hearing your despair we choose hope (that TPP will pass). Seeing your ignorance we choose understanding (that single-payer will never ever happen).

      As citizens of the world* (*not including Yemen, Venezuela, Russia, Libya, Syria, Honduras, Pakistan, Iraq, Paraguay, Bolivia, Ecuador…) we stand united against your brand of division.


      The Acela Bubble

  44. Vatch

    Has anyone mentioned Hayes v. Tilden in 1876? Samuel Tilden’s popular vote was 4,288,546 versus Rutherford B. Hayes with only 4,034,311. Yet Hayes won with 185 electoral votes from 21 states versus Tilden’s 184 electoral votes in 17 states.

    1. MyLessThanPrimeBeef

      It’d be interesting to look over all UN votes tabulated by nations versus national populations.

      Or senate votes.

  45. susan the other

    Listening to Leonard Cohen is good therapy right now. The more we try, the darker it gets. I’m more than a little uneasy about Trump’s “cabinet” and his Sec of the Treasury especially. I’m hoping he has the courage of his convictions when it comes to deficit spending – but most of all I would be happy if he turned money on its head and made it worth only what it accomplished… we could solve a lot of craziness that way.

    1. rd

      Hope and change in 2009 brought us the splendor of Timothy Geithner at Treasury to save the financial system that he had helped preside over.

      Now change could bring us Dimon or Icahn to help save the common man.

      Much more change and we will be calcified in place.

  46. financial matters

    If we do end up getting a substantial fiscal stimulus this should take some of the pressure off the Fed’s monetary policy allowing them to raise interest rates a bit. This should help take some of the irrational exuberance out of the asset bubbles in stocks and real estate.

  47. alex morfesis

    Big time buyers remorse here in north tampa bay florida…president karrottop is in trouble…been down here over a decade…have never seen a veterans day that had basically zero flags…

    and this area hands down voted for president biff…

    This does not bode well for el cadillo americano

    1. Tracie

      (Please excuse delay of response and off topic subject, but I think this is cool…) Green Tree Pythons undergo Ontogenetic color change: the juvenile green tree python starts life out as a yellow snake (some start red and then turn yellow) before acquiring more and more patches of green as they mature and move from the ground where they blend in with the dying yellow leaves, to the tree crown where they blend in with the live green ones.

  48. UserFriendly

    More anti-Trump action planned after second night of protests across US Guardian. Have a look at the subhead: “Activists say they are weighing up their next moves, as hundreds of people take to the streets again following election of Donald Trump.” “Hundreds of people”?!? And this is the lead story at the US edition of the Guardian?

    The protests are stupid, I’ve been fighting with my local Socialist Alternative, who have been organizing the Minneapolis protests, trying to get them to stop. No luck yet. I think they just really like walking on highways.

    But the part about the Guardian covering it is about 1/4 of why I wanted Trump. Under Dems the MSM is loathed to cover protests. How long was it before #NoDAPL got air time? If it’s against Trump, you can bet the media will cover 5 people with a sign. He is less likely to be swayed by protests, but at least the public will hear about them. It really is the only way us peasants can send a message.

    The dumb kids are protesting because they bought the MSM narrative that Trump is Hitler, wouldn’t you protest if we just elected Hitler? It will die off soon enough.

    1. Kim Kaufman

      As I recall, the msm loved “protests” back in 2009 when if 3 or 4 people were gathered on a street corner, calling themselves The Tea Party, it would be picked up by NPR and many others. The media is a big problem in all this.

    2. Andrew Watts

      Good job at trying to de-escalation even if they’re futile. I honestly think they’re just blowing off steam. They were taught to idolize the campus radicals of the 60s/70s which didn’t exactly work out great.

    1. MyLessThanPrimeBeef

      Hollywood more or less does it the same.

      Looking at opera stars and pop singers and where they tour, one will notice nothing different either.

  49. Peter

    An interesting comment on MishTalk:

    “First – Clinton did not win the popular vote. Support for third party candidates meant nobody won the popular vote.

    Second, a mere seven states gave Clinton a wide lead of 7 million plus votes. Without those seven states Trump took the rest of the country, 43 states, by 7 million votes.”

    1. bob

      “Support for third party candidates meant nobody won the popular vote.”

      The vote for nobody, in the form of people staying home, was a clear rebuke, and the only plurality. it has nothing to do with 3rd, 4th or 5th parties.

      It seems more a start to a diatribe against 3rd parties, but I stopped trying to figure him out years ago. Similar to Haygood- interesting, informative, but with huge doses of ‘where the hell did that come from?’

  50. Kurt Sperry

    We knew it was going to be bad but I briefly thought Trump might actually be interested in creating some sort of practical movement uniting currently disparate populist elements, given his past relationships with moderates, his overtures to Bernie, his apparent antipathy to the Republican “establishment”. Instead we see, in the names being floated, a surprisingly radical bunch of hard right cast-offs and retreads from the furthest right fringes of the Republican past: fifties throwback movement conservatives, brain dead climate deniers, Taliban-like radical fundamentalist Christians, unrepentant bigots, cartoon villain financiers. Wow.

    I didn’t have Trump pegged as a fringe-right paleo-conservative at all. I’m actually quite surprised how radical right wing he seems to actually be. He was, for instance, very friendly to the corporate Democrats for a lot of years, contributed to Hillary’s Senate campaign etc. He seems to somehow have turned from a quasi-moderate into a total foaming at the mouth, nutbar wingnut in a surprisingly short period of time. I seriously wonder if he has suffered a recent stroke or something. If he follows through on his populist trade rhetoric (sadly, unlikely as the people he has surrounded himself will never get on board with that) and doesn’t start a hot war with Russia I’ll accept that as upside, but we may be looking at a situation with Trump where the GWB and Reagan administrations will retrospectively look like pinko, socialist regimes by comparison.

  51. EndOfTheWorld

    Remember, Trump is well aware that getting himself assassinated would be totally counterproductive. Ever since JFK’s brain tissue was splattered onto the pavement of Dealey Plaza, this concept has been uppermost in the minds of all president-elects. But don’t judge The Donald so harshly so early. He’s a natural showman and will provide the populace with many surprises before his term is over.

    That is, if he succeeds in not getting assassinated.

  52. Oregoncharles

    Vineyards aren’t, or shouldn’t be, water hogs. Here in the Willamette Valley, it doesn’t rain effectively for 6 months, but vineyards are never irrigated and table grapes also thrive without irrigation.

    A deep drought like California’s might be different, but not compared to, say, veggies or even almonds.

    1. Yves Smith Post author


      In Australia, which has invested a lot in viniculture (it has the best in the world), its wine industry is cited as one of the big reasons Australia exports more water than it is “worth” domestically in the form of agricultural exports.

      This article repeatedly refers to drilling wells and irrigation:

      This also indicates irrigation is used in CA:

      See also:

      1. Oregoncharles

        Just speaking from my own experience. I’ve worked in vineyards and grow table grapes. Might depend on soils, or on the amount of rain we get in the winter (really only about 40 inches, but saturates the soil,) or of course on temperatures – cooler here, for now.

        Might give the Oregon wine industry a big advantage, soon.

        1. Andrew Watts

          The Willamette Valley has a similar Mediterranean climate as Bordeaux so the soil probably counts for more. The ability of the top soil to absorb and retain moisture is probably the main factor at work. It’s filled with eons of volcanic ash adding to it’s excellence.

        2. Waldenpond

          CA also has a Mediterranean climate. The problem is they developed their crop with watering. The roots are shallow and dependent on watering. They would have to tear up their crop and start over. There are some wineries (and orchards) that are deep root and use cover crops etc and do fine but they are minimal.

  53. robnume

    Note to Silicon Valley: Don’t let the door hit you in the ass on the way out. Maybe you can start your own country somewhere; no, you cannot have California, so stop the “secession” crap here and now.

  54. Plenue

    >‘Crashing waves’ of jihadists fray soldiers’ nerves in Mosul battle Reuters

    ‘The militants call the operation “crashing waves”. Each unit includes suicide bombers, snipers, assault fighters, and what they call infiltrators, as well as logistics and mortar experts.

    “Each one only fights for a short period and is then relieved by the next group – it exhausts the army,” Hashemi said.’

    ‘Adopting a formation known as kuruma gakari, or “winding wheel,” Kenshin crashed violently into Shingen’s “crane.” The winding wheel was an offensive maneuver allowing units that had become exhausted or depleted to be replaced with a fresh unit, thus enabling the attacker to maintain the force and momentum of the attack.’

    1. MyLessThanPrimeBeef

      That was a very famous battle.

      Thanks for linking to the winding wheel formation. Very educational.

  55. robnume

    On 5 countries Hillary supporters can move to: There is one country left off of this list which was virtually destroyed by SOS Hillary and no, it’s not Libya; it’s Honduras. President Manuel Zelaya was democratically elected to his presidential position and Clinton and Co. decided he had to go. And it’s certainly easy enough for some on that list to leave; they’re already Canadian citizens.

  56. Oregoncharles

    Now I can’t find where I posted about the popular-vote scheme up above, but here’s the link:

    And a correction: the email I just got says that Oregon has NOT signed on. they have about 3/4ths the electoral votes they need to activate it. An interesting example of federalism in action.

  57. amousie

    The popular vote:

    Wikipedia numbers say Trump won more voters than McCain but fewer than Romney. That tells me that over the last 12 years Republican turnout is fairly consistent regardless of the candidate.

    Clinton got about 9 million fewer in 2008 than Obama did and 5 million less than 2012. That tells me that the Democrats didn’t want those new voters and the mandate they gave the Democrats to clean house.

    Isn’t it interesting that now we’re back to the so-called “new-normal” of the acrimonious split down the middle. Well, without the so-called 120 odd million (give or take) eligible voters who don’t vote. Get half of those voters to build a 3rd party and that’s a 3-way 60 million voter horse race.

    Now that would be something I’d be interested in seeing and hearing about rather than the hiprocrisy I’ve been hearing locally about don’t trust and verify. Hell, where was that when it came to the Obama administration? This he meant well crap but those nasty fully repudiated Republicans of 2008 stopped him.

    9 million voters gave Obama a mandate. Hell, what a waste of time voting proved to be in 2008. Clinton was a horrible candidate but I have to respect that she did tell the truth: she told us she’d manage our decent.

    I guess those 9 million voters really didn’t want to have their lives go further down the drain. After all, they’d already learned that it didn’t matter who they gave a mandate to, the Powers that Be would still come out on top.

  58. different clue

    People burned New Balance shoes? Really? In protest at New Balance objections to TPP? What kind of people would burn shoes to support TPP? Clintonites, now doubt. And maybe Social Justice Warriors.

    Maybe the Trump community should be apprised of this, so that they can show their support for New Balance’s economic patriotism by buying New Balance shoes. I know I will continue to buy New Balance shoes, now more than ever.

Comments are closed.