NEW NORMALS: "The American people are pretty sharp!"

WEDNESDAY, NOVEMBER 6, 2024

Except actually, nowe aren't: For at least a generation, it's been a standard bit of messaging from "highly educated," high-profile American pundits:

The American people are pretty sharp!

That has always made for excellent messaging. Whatever else may have been involved, repetition of this bromide helped pundits remain well liked.

The American people are pretty sharp? Actually no, we aren't! That includes this gaggle of "highly educated," high-end journalistsand who knows?

 In some cases, it's possible that some of those tribunes even believed what they said!

Last night's outcome wasn't a revolutionexcept to the extent that it may become one. Numbers changed in a limited wayin a way which makes total sense at a time when people feel, by a very wide margin, that the nation is on "the wrong track."

Tens of millions of neighbors and friends believe that we're on the wrong track. Having said that, so what?

In Blue America, we kept ignoring the still-unexplained, manifest strangeness which was allowed to transpire, for more than three years, at the southern border. To this day, we're still conflating the cost of living with the current inflation figure.

Our tribunes kept insisting that President Biden was sharp as a tack. Over on the Fox News Channel, they kept playing the pieces of videotape which seemed to debunk that claim.

Are we the people actually sharp? This morning, the C-Span web site has joined that of the Internet Archive. For a reason we can't explain, C-Span's website seems to be down. 

Has C=Span been hit by a cyberattack, like the Archive before it? We have no idea! But C-Span's failure to respond robs us of the chance to transcribe a trio of phone calls the network received during Sunday morning's broadcast. of Washington Journal.

How sharp are we the American people? Based upon our notes, the three calls were received, one after the other, starting at 8:55 a.m. Eastern.

The American people are pretty sharp? Here's what three callers said, one right after another:

Caller One: Caller One said that she would be voting for Candidate Harris. She cited the fact that Candidate Trump has had three wives as the defining point of concern.

Caller Two: Caller Two said that he would also be voting for Harrisand he was predicting a blowout. He noted the fact that Candidate Trump doesn't have a pet, while Candidate Harris has a dog.

Caller Three: Caller Three said she'd be voting for Candidate Trump.  Who was in office when the Dobbs decision was reached? "The Democrats," she sagaciously said, plainly suggesting that the Dobbs decision was therefore the Democrats' fault!

You'll think that we're inventing these calls. You'll think that, but we aren't.

To our ear, there was no sign that these callers were anything other than fully sincere. We can't link you to the audiotape of these calls because C-Span, like the Internet Archive, is now, for some reason, down.

When we listened to those phone calls, we heard America singing, if only in very small part. Rather, we were hearing the voices of three fellow citizensthree of the well over 100 million neighbors and friends who would be going out there to vote.

In all honesty, we the humans aren't especially sharp, and there's exactly zero sign that we ever were. That includes the class of experts who get dragged into Blue America's messaging venues to feed us the porridge we like.

Last night's outcome wasn't a revolution. Candidate Trump will almost surely end up winning the nationwide popular vote, but only by maybe three points.

That's a change from four years ago. On the other hand, it isn't a giant change, given the circumstances under which this campaign took place.

How did we Blues approach this election? Let us count (a few of) the ways:

For starters, we operated under an amazingly braindead bromide:

Don't ask, don't let them tell!

Please don't interview Trump voters, we said again and again. Please don't ask them how the world looks to them. Don't ask them why they're supporting Candidate Trump.

Any time a major news org dared to do some such thing, we Blues begged them to stop. It's hard to be much dumber than that, but we (highly educated) Blues were constantly willing to try.

We didn't leave things there. Starting at 4 o'clock Eastern each afternoon, Blue America's "cable news" channel focused its attention on this pleasing porridge:

Trump Trump Trump Trump jail!

Lock him up, our tribunes said, all day and then into the night. In the process, they completely ignored the facts of life which were driving the outlook of The Others.

They ignored the outlook of the deplorables who went out and voted yesterday, even possibly of the "garbage" out there.

(Once President Biden had blurted that latter term, we insisted that Red America had blown right past his implied apostrophe! It's hard to be more pathetic than that, but as a tribe, we've always been willing to try.)

In the end, one of those deplorables called C-Span with that ridiculous claim about the Dobbs decision. That said, this is who we the people areand at some point, those of us in Blue America have to ask ourselves this basic question:

Do we like other people, or not?

All through the annals of human history, the general answer to that question has generally been no. We humans are wired to like our own, to refer to the Others as "trash."

That's where Candidate Vance just went, in the campaign's dying days. In part due to the landlocked nature of our own Blue American world, we are now looking ahead to rule by a gaggle like this:

The brain trust which has emerged: 
Donald J. Trump
Elon Musk
Robert F. Kennedy, Jr.
JD Vance
Tucker Carlson

Next in line will be fellows like Bannon. It was Bannon to whom Carlson made his latest confessionhis claim that our problems with hurricanes stem from our many abortions. That followed his account of the way he was bloodied in bed by unseen demons, even as his wife and his four dogs soundly slept.

We've now purchased rule by that peculiar crew, and on downward from there. To us, those people all seem to be disorderedbut the mental giants in Blue America all agreed, from beginning to end, that any such medical possibility must never be mentioned or discussed.

So it was decided by Usby the plainly brighter class among us the rational animals.

Are we humans "the rational animal?" Is it possible that we ever were?

Isn't it pretty to think so! A decade ago, writing for the New York Times, Professor Horwich shot that notion down.

Interpreting the later Wittgenstein, the professor brought in the mail. The highest achievements of western world thought were really "the misbegotten products of linguistic illusion and muddled thinking," the professor said that the later Wittgenstein had said.

We think the professor got it pretty much right! Over here in Blue America, we motored ahead into an era when we pleasingly wiped away the age-old distinction between misstatements and lies.

So it went with our own muddled thinking, with a thousand examples to follow. Over there in Red America, the others were routinely able to see what our tribunes kept choosing to do.

On our side, we wanted to lock him up. The business types inside our own tribe's "cable news" channel kept using that as the pretty idea which would keep us returning for more.

On and on and on we went. On our side, we're so dumb that we somehow managed to convince ourselves that Stormy Daniels was a "feminist hero," based on the way she struggled and strained to shake Trump down for cash.

It's hard to be much dumber than that; we were willing to try. Over there, in Red America, the lesser breed was persistently able to see what we, the finer people, were haplessly trying to do.

What will President Trump do this time around? We have no way of knowing.

If he goes ahead with his apparently lunatic tariff plan, the economy may get very bad. If that happens, it will take a lot of violent rhetoric and action, in other areas, to keep us the people in line.

(Or he may just dismiss Jack Smith, then go play golf for four years. We have no way of knowing what the fellow will do.)

That said, there will likely be a lot of new normals in the days ahead. Almost surely, there's one thing which will never change:

We Blues will never understand the way we look to Others. According to a handful of actual experts, our human wiring doesn't equip us for some such task.

We humans aren't built for that task! Is a new beast slouching toward Bethlehem now, as one anthropologist foretold?

We the humans just aren't super-sharp! At some point, we Blues may have to ask ourselves this. It's a question straight outta Bill Clinton:

Do we like other humans, or not?

171 comments:

  1. I, too, would have like to see our cable news stars tie Trump's crimes to our need for Prison Reform.
    Imprisoning the rich and powerful when they break the law, is the quickest way there. Don't kid yourself, when the rich and powerful complain, things get done.

    ReplyDelete
  2. We lost because Somerby couldn't bring himself to ask his readers to vote for Harris, because his mealy-mouthed bothsides cover-his-ass approach to life could place him squarely behind the best candidate, and because Somerby is a racist, misogynist asshole -- just like men all over the country.

    You guys wanted Trump, well you're going to get him until he dies and leaves you with Vance. Enjoy your victory.

    Today Somerby is saying we should blame ourselves. No thank you. I voted for goodness but evil has triumphed. This is on Somerby and his bros.

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. "Somerby is a racist, misogynist asshole -- just like men all over the country."

      Have you considered the possibility that you're a misandrist asshole?

      Delete
    2. Men voted against a woman because she is a woman. Women didn't vote against Trump because he is a man. They voted for him, to all of our sorrow and against their own interests. That's why there is no symmetry of the kind you suggest.

      You think like a worm.

      Delete
    3. Anonymouse 1:00pm, Comma La isn’t just a woman, she’s a woman who failed to make the case as to how things might be better if she was president. That she isn’t Trump is not the definitive argument you think it should be.
      You think like a hack.

      Delete
    4. She made the case fine. The voters failed to respond by voting for her. It is on the voters. Since you didn't vote for her (or you wouldn't be here saying these things), it is on you too. I hold you personally responsible for the consequences, which will be highly undesirable no matter who they fall on.

      You are not clever when you respond with something like "You think like a hack." You show yourself to be mean-spirited and ugly.

      Here is an example of your ugliness. You continue to misspell her name, even though she is no longer running and the election is over. Why do that? It is gratuitously disrespectful to another human being to attempt to diminish them that way. But this is what most right wingers are like, and it is why I dislike them as people, aside from their political views (which mostly arise from their ugliness as human beings).

      Somerby may be entirely right about the depths of some human beings, but he is wrong that all humans are the same, depraved and foolish. Most of those who had the perspicacity to vote for Harris are decent and good people in other aspects of life. The same is not true of Trump voters.

      Delete
    5. You’re not clever when you think like a hack by arguing “The voters failed to respond by voting for her. It’s on the voters.”

      It’s up to candidates to appeal to voters. It’s not the fault of the voters that she didn’t appeal to them to the point where they elected her president. That’s on HER.

      It’s really amazing how anonymices can insult whole parties of people and anyone who disagrees with them and then act as though my making fun of the fits Harris’s champions ( NOT Harris, herself) made over the pronunciation of her name is hatred personified.

      You’re a hack.

      Delete
    6. Right, candidates appeal but the voters decide whether to respond. But Harris has no way to compell voters to vote for her, so she doesn't have the power or ability to gain votes by force. It is the voters who decide, not Harris. So it cannot be on Harris.

      You need to stop mispronouncing Harris's name because it is so yesterday, now that the election is over. The youngs will mock YOU on their social media because you are clinging to memes that are over and done.

      Hack is name-calling. What else do you have? Anything?

      Delete
  3. "We Blues will never understand the way we look to Others. According to a handful of actual experts, our human wiring doesn't equip us for some such task."

    More lies. 1. There are no experts saying any of the stuff Somerby puts in their mouths. 2. We blues didn't do or say anything that swung this election to Trump. Trump won in spite of our best efforts, not because of them. 3. Human wiring gave us the Enlightenment and democracy. The encouragement by the media and big business of greed and self-interest is what put Trump into office. Believe it or not, altruism is part of human wiring too. Somerby's jaundiced view of humanity has no place this morning when we liberals (excluding Somerby) must mourn our country's fate. We don't need Somerby rubbing this loss, which we did not create, in our faces and making us feel worse. Humans comfort each other. They don't stomp on dreams and hopes, the way Somerby does. Somerby is in the wrong place if he wants to blame the victims today.

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. "We don't need Somerby rubbing this loss, which we did not create, in our faces and making us feel worse"

      Yes we do. Today more than ever.

      Delete
    2. It’s people like Hector that led to Trump winning.

      And Vance is next.

      Enjoy having no abortion, no contraception, massive amounts of deportation of the people who thanklessly do our dirty work for us.

      Welcome to the rise of the Russian empire, the death of all Palestinians.

      Thanks Hector, you’ve been a big help.

      I hope y’all like recessions, a big one is coming.

      Delete
    3. Basically, Somerby says we should take out the beam in our own eye before picking at the speck in our neighbor's. Historically, this take has proven to be highly unpopular.

      Delete
    4. You mean "mote" not "beam". That means something different. You trolls got your way. It is time for you to leave now.

      Delete
    5. Actually, it it is you who doesn't seem to understand that "mote" and "speck" are synonyms.

      Delete
    6. mote and beam are not synonyms

      beam definition -- a ray or shaft of light

      mote definition -- a tiny piece of a substance

      I said nothing about specks -- you did and that is not in the original quote.

      The comparison of a mote to a beam is from Matthew 7:5 and it uses mote and beam, not speck. He means that someone is blinded by the sun in their eyes, since beams did not come from anywhere else in that time period. No specks are mentioned by Matthew. But at least get the quote right, as it is usually given in English.

      When you substitute your own words into famous quotes, you create confusion among those who know the original quotation, and disrespect the original source (in this case, the Bible). It also reveals you as an undereducated person, a hick trying to be pretentious.

      Delete
    7. I have a ray or shaft of light that holds my roof. You know..a beam.

      Delete
    8. Some anonymouse with a beam ( ray, shaft of light…) the size of…a tree… told me to take the mote ( tiny piece of substance) out of my eye. What a hypocrite. Must be an anonymouse.

      Delete
    9. Typical that Cecelia won't get our names right, just as she won't use Harris's proper name now that the election is over. Like other MAGAs, she finds being disrespectful to innocent people invigorating. The problem is that you cannot consider yourself a nice person while hurting others for the joy of feeling powerful (or whatever it is that Cecelia likes about insulting people).

      Delete
    10. Anonymouse 3:32pm, you’re not innocent people. You’re vicious people who come to a blog in order to call someone a pedophile.

      What are your names?

      Delete
    11. As noted many times before, no one here calls Somerby a pedophile except you and PP. We object to Somerby defending accused sexual predator Roy Moore, convicted felon Trump (against Stormy Daniels), convicted rapist Brock Turner (against Chanel Miller), and similar miscreants. None of us told Somerby to take their sides, which means we didn't come here specifically to call anyone a pedophile, as you falsely claim. I have also objected to the way Somerby singles out and attacks female professionals in various fields, from the Supreme Court to cable news to print journalism, calling women some ugly names (especially Maddow) and asserting that those women are unqualified for their jobs. That is an ugly side to Somerby.

      Each of us has put a name on our comment. Anonymous is a legitimate name, and much more true than your surely false name of Cecelia. Of course we are innocent. This is cyberspace not the real world. But your aggressive intimidation tactic is noted. Push a Republican too far and they get violent. It hasn't been that long since the last time you guys were accused of attempted cyberstalking. When you ask for real names, you are taking the stalking off the internet and that is a crime in several states. So watch it.

      Delete
    12. In case you are so dumb that you don't know you are using our names incorrectly:

      anonymous is a nym
      anonymouse is a corruption of that nym intended to demean other commenters by equating them to rodents

      It is respectful to use someone's name as they themselves have identified it. That means you call them what they call themselves. That is anonymous, not anonymouse or anonymice, no matter how cute you think your play on words is. Same with Kamala Harris or anyone else being named here. She lost -- there is no reason to continue to demean her. But that's another way in which Republicans are bad winners. As nice as Harris's concession speech may be, Republicans will still be calling her sexist things at their websites.

      Delete
    13. Anonymouse 3:56pm, look up the term “anonymous”. Blogger (the site) didn’t offer you a nym via “anonymous”, it offered you the opportunity to post anonymously.

      Delete
    14. Anonymouse 3:56pm, go to Twitter and look at how white women are being described today.

      Delete
    15. What hair is being split @4:37?

      I don't spend any time on Twitter. No, I don't think I will go there. I know it won't make me happy, since you are recommending it.

      Delete
    16. "The comparison of a mote to a beam is from Matthew 7:5 and it uses mote and beam, not speck."

      Depends on the translation. Some translations use "mote," some use "speck." And "beam," in this instance, means a beam of wood, not a beam of light.

      Since you're such a well-educated person, I'd think you'd know that. Check the different translations. (E.g., Lexham English Bible - "First remove the beam of wood from your own eye and then you will see clearly to remove the speck from your brother’s eye!")

      Delete
    17. No, I am not going to waste time crawling through theological disputes over translation. But do try closing your eyes and imaging what a beam of wood in your eye might be like. Do you think that situation came up very often in Biblical times, to the point where Matthew thought it would make an understandable analogy? Or do you think getting the sun in your eyes would be more frequent? But those guys in Lexham surely know what they're doing, I assume. Maybe Matthew didn't, and the oddness goes back to the source?

      Delete
    18. PP, that clueless chidding anonymouse exchange as to “beam” in the eye has to be the funniest thing I’ve seen here in awhile.

      Delete
    19. 3:51. Are you out of your mind? I have never called Somerby a pedophile, unless you count my merciless mocking of someone (was it you?) who did, in fact, suggest (without reason or evidence) that Somerby is a pedophile. And I'm wondering: Why do you constantly just make shit up?

      Delete
    20. You and Cecelia are the only ones putting the words pedophile and Somerby in the same sentence. Somerby made a big point of saying that the man who lusts after young teens is called a hebephile not a pedophile, so we would have called him that, if we were calling him anything along those lines. But he did defend Roy Moore.

      Ask Cecelia why she keeps using the word pedophile when it is inaccurate?

      Delete
  4. "On and on and on we went. On our side, we're so dumb that we somehow managed to convince ourselves that Stormy Daniels was a "feminist hero," based on the way she struggled and strained to shake Trump down for cash."

    This is what misogynist gloating looks like. Somerby thinks that because Trump won, that makes him right about his own feelings toward women, including that Trump's attempt to cheat on his wife undiscovered and then evade consequences is all Stormy's fault.

    We lost because men like Somerby voted for Trump.

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. How about the women who voted for Trump? Where do they fit into your equation?

      Delete
    2. If women voted their own interests instead of those of their husbands, Harris would have won.

      How bad are Republican mothers that their sons will do absolutely anything and elect a pig like Trump simply to avoid being governed by a female president?

      Delete
  5. Shorter Somerby: “I tried to warn you!”

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. Somerby has said the same thing before every election. Even a stopped clock...yada yada yada.

      Delete
    2. Bob nailed it.
      Turns out Trump voters are crying out for civility in politics.

      Delete
    3. “AnonymousNovember 6, 2024 at 10:36 AM
      How about the women who voted for Trump? Where do they fit into your equation?”

      They’re all really men pretending to be women.

      Delete
    4. I do not understand the depth of evil that some people are willing to stoop to. That includes you, Cecelia. You are a truly awful person.

      Delete
    5. Anonymouse 10:58am, come on. You have an experience with the depths of evil every day of your life. It happens every time you encounter dissent.

      Delete
    6. PP, I don’t think Bob knew that Trump’s support among Hispanics and black men would increase as it did or that the media plot device about white women falling all over Comma La was fairy tale.

      Delete
    7. PP, Cecelia has posted several comments today without using her nym. Where is your tirade against her?

      Delete
    8. Anyone can claim that Trump will win -- look at Bill Maher for example. That doesn't make him right. Only the election determines who has won.

      Delete
    9. Anonymouse 11:58am, I posted one anonymouse comment accidentally and immediately identified it. That’s someone different… from being an eternally nameless anonymouse.

      Delete
    10. Anonymouse 11:59am that’s hilarious!

      Delete
    11. More than one. The ones you identify conceal the others that you post without identifying. You find it hilarious that the NY Times has called this election while there is still vote counting in swing states?

      Delete
    12. Irony alert: An Anon is complaining that other Anons don't use the proper nym!

      Delete
    13. Cecelia is not another Anon, except when she is not using her nym either. The problem is that she is denying doing this. No one cares whether she uses a nym or not, but she is being a big fat hypocrite when she posts anonymously after criticizing others for doing so.

      Delete
    14. Anonymouse 2:27pm, I’ve ID’d every post where I’ve accidentally pulled down the drop bar. There would be no reason for me to do that if I was trying to post anonymously. There is no reason for me to post anonymously. You’d know it was me immediately if I ever tried.

      Now go soak your head.

      Delete
    15. How do we know that is true if you posted as anonymous? You could even be the person who argues with you, if others here were ignoring your named comments. That's what I would do if I were a troll being ignored by others.

      Note the famous lack of empathy. She says her thing and then cannot resist telling others to soak their heads. The violence at the end is the MAGA signature. Maybe that is why she thinks we would know it is her, even without a nym?

      Delete
    16. Cecelia is Somerby's drag name here in comments.

      Delete
    17. Anonymouse 3:41pm, that’s quite the compliment to me.

      Delete
    18. I'll bet Somerby considers it an insult to him though.

      Delete
    19. Anonymouse 6:39pm, he would be correct in that.

      Delete
    20. That's between you and him.

      Delete
  6. This is "own the libs" taken to its ultimate conclusion. How do you think it feels to be the hated (immigrant, black or brown or Hispanic, poor, female, liberal, educated, a journalist) and wake up to this result this morning? We will be on the receiving end of whatever they dish out. Somerby's fatuous words this morning will not stop the bloodbath Trump has promised.

    ReplyDelete
  7. I thought they promised us that the election wasn't over until all the votes were counted? How is it that the NY Times has declared the election over so soon?

    ReplyDelete
  8. Why would I need others to ask Trump voters why they support Trump?
    "The Daily Howler" reports their grievances on the regular.

    ReplyDelete
  9. From twitter (via Digby):

    "He was the worst President in history. And when he got voted out, he tried to stage a coup. Then he stole national secrets and sold the ones he didn’t store in the bathroom. He was convicted of fraud, found liable of sexual assault and convicted of 34 felonies. He is half a billion dollars in debt, owned by God only knows who, and the biggest national security risk the nation has ever had.

    But at least he’s not a Black woman."

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. “But at least he’s not a Black woman”

      Wow. SO now we know that Digby isn’t just your coven’s high priestess, on TDH she’s an anonymouse flying monkey.

      Delete
    2. Cecelia, you moron, you still cannot read despite winning an election. This came from twitter and was posted on Digby's site. She didn't write it herself. What is wrong with you?

      Delete
    3. Anonymouse 11:02am, Digby has a Twitter account where she is currently bellyaching similarly.

      Delete
    4. Digby didn't say the words she reposted on her blog. Yes, she almost certainly has said other things, you moron.

      Delete
    5. Anonymouse 11:57 am, “ From twitter (via Digby):”

      What does sound like concerning a person who is very active on Twitter, Einstein?

      Delete
    6. If I said "From Digby on twitter" it would mean what you suggest. You continue to struggle with English despite all of this practice. Your next assignment should perhaps be in your native language. Fucking moron.

      Delete
    7. Anonymouse 1:04pm, you continue to be a disingenuous anonymouse.

      “From Twitter (via Digby)” is as logically assumed to be a tweet from Digby, as it is as being a retweet by Digby.

      Delete
    8. Via means "by means of" or "through" or "by way of"

      If I said From Twitter by means of Digby, it would mean Digby has reposted the tweet. It doesn't mean Digby authored the tweet. If it did, I could simply say "Digby tweeted".

      Many blogs aggregate ideas and information and excerpts from other sources. They use such language to show that the info came from somewhere else. They would never say that something they wrote came via themselves. But when repeating something from somewhere else, indicating the source is done saying "via" or "h/t" which means hat-tip, which is giving credit to someone else as a source.

      I get it that English is confusing to you, but I do wish you were more qualified for your position as troll assigned to this blog. Your frequent confusion are only occasionally amusing and more often annoying.

      What I don't get is why you stubbornly persist in a wrong position even after it has been shown to be wrong. I suspect it is part of your obsession to always have the last word on any thread. Being the last one standing after a tiresome dispute (like this one) doesn't make you right. It makes you a jerk who cannot admit to being wrong about anything. And that makes me very glad I don't know you in person. Imagine how little fun you would be at the local pub.

      Delete
    9. Anonymouse 6:38 pm, I stubbornly persist because you’ve made a mountain out of a molehill in your eternal effort to chide and to bully. You’re mices, you’re cut out for whining, not dominating.

      Just ignoring the speciousness of your argument that I should have detected that you meant Digby had retweeted a comment rather than tweeting one, you still would be ignoring that by doing that Digby had endorsed the odious and racially charged quip that implied every Trump voter was merely voting against a black person. I suppose that conclusion beats examination and reflection. Thats anonymouse flying monkey material. It should be beneath her.

      Delete
  10. "Remaining silent and surrendering to despair is exactly what fascists want us to do. So let’s not."

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. Anonymouse 10:57am, speaking of which, Comma La has yet to concede. She also didn’t go out to her supporters last night to thank and encourage them. That was the case with Hillary too in 2016.

      Would that sort of concern and maturity be too indicative of being manly?

      Delete
    2. Harris is expected to concede in a speech tonight. In case you are too stupid to know, the votes haven't been fully counted yet.

      Delete
    3. Cecelia,

      is that a reference to the manly concession Trump made in 2020? Oops! He didn't give one.

      Kind of completely undercuts your argument, huh C?

      Delete
    4. Anonymouse 12:17pm, he thanked the people who had stood for hours waiting on him. It’s taking Comma La and took Hillary a while to do even that.

      Delete
    5. No, it didn't. You just type any lie you want. Is that how the next 4 years will be? No one able to trust a thing anyone else says. Well, that's how Trump operates and that is how Cecelia operates and presumably that will encourage all of the other right wing assholes in our society to lie at every opportunity, and our country will become a total shithole, as Trump predicted.

      You are scum Cecelia. Go away.

      Delete
    6. Anonymouse 12:29pm, I’m well aware that anonymices are of the bent where they enjoy dramatically wringing their hands over the injustice of other people actually harboring divergent views. I understand that you adore ordering people to go away as though this was your blog. Here’s a tip- don’t read me. Put yourself out of your misery, because I’m not going away on your order.

      Delete
    7. Your view (such as it is) is not divergent. You spout the conservative party line. You need to go away because you are here for no other purpose than to hurt other people. I see that you are trying to turn this into a power struggle, about who has the authority to make someone else go away. If you were a good decent person, you would stop baiting liberals on the day when we are grieving, because you would be too nice to do that. You are not that kind of person, which is my point about you. Stop trying to put out your metaphorical cigarette butts on other people's skin. Go drink champagne with your Republican friends -- oh, you don't have any? Wonder why that is?

      Delete
    8. Anonymouse 2:24pm, like I’ve said, anonymouse sensibilities as to insults or being piqued, go only one way. You never chide a fellow TDH hater for these things. Never.

      You’ve disingenuously whined all day in an attempt to control others from giving back to you what you dish out. It’s right out of the Soros playbook.Stick that where the sun don’t shine.

      Delete
    9. What you term a "TDH hater" is usually someone discussing what Somerby has said, disagreeing perhaps but also explaining and discussing what was said, and not just gratuitously hurling insults at other commenters.

      Delete
    10. Soros, if he pays anyone money on the internet, is not paying for people to argue with trolls like you. You are not that important. I am doing it to work out the bile arising from these election results. You are an insult to the hard work and decency of Democrats who had their hopes disappointed by the orange-faced moron who promised young men the right to behave like assholes with impunity. It is going to be very hard for future historians to characterize Trump's campaign as anything more than that, while the intelligent and hardworking people of this country tried to elect Harris. I can only imagine how the result of the world is cringing at our election results. It has become embarrassing to travel overseas, where we are both pitied and patronized by good decent people with real leaders.

      Delete
    11. "Soros playbook" went out with the hula hoop and Captain Kangaroo.

      Try and catch up.

      Delete
    12. Soros and son are very much in play and have a systematic plan for winning. Just as sports teams have playbooks. Anonymices bombarding blogs are a part of that. Bob makes that easy for you by putting his stuff out there and not being particularly concerned about the comment board. Kevin Drum makes attempts at usurpation harder for you.

      Delete
  11. Trump's victory represents a significant historical event. It sends a message that a majority of voters want to redefine existing establishment power structures—the kind our host has been criticizing for years and continues to criticize today. It’s a purposeful rejection of “blue media” and other entrenched institutions, including banks, Congress, and healthcare systems, etc. Last night, Trump shifted from being a disruptor in 2016 to now being an agent of political retribution against these institutions, like blue media. Historically, this makes perfect sense.

    This is an interesting take that describes it well:

    "Before Mr. Trump came along, power was in the hands of a political cartel, which, like the market cartels that Adam Smith had warned about, involved institutions that should have been in robust competition but were instead cooperating to exclude rival “products” or ideas. The cartel’s overpriced, shoddy goods failed to satisfy the public’s demands.

    Perhaps Mr. Trump and the movement he brings to Washington will not meet them either. It’s worth remembering that most new companies that break up established market relationships do not last long — they only discover an opportunity that someone else later makes the most of."


    https://www.nytimes.com/2024/11/06/opinion/donald-trump-2024-election.html

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. "banks, Congress, and healthcare systems"

      Are you kidding? What kind of changes to any of these institutions did Trump bring about in his first term? Other than to insist that GOP Congressmen toady up to him?

      Have you already forgotten Trump's 'concepts of a plan' healthcare proposal this time around? You're spouting gibberish.

      Delete
    2. That is not the point. The point is he has been given a mandate to destroy those institutions, not change them. History would show that he won't be able to rebuild them effectively. That will happen later on by some other movement by the right or the left. This is the point:

      "Those who see in Mr. Trump a profound rejection of Washington’s present conventions are correct. He is like an atheist defying the teachings of a church: The challenge he presents lies not so much in what he does but in the fact that he calls into question the beliefs on which authority rests. Mr. Trump has shown that the nation’s political orthodoxies are bankrupt, and the leaders in all our institutions — private as well as public — who stake their claim to authority on their fealty to such orthodoxies are now vulnerable."

      Delete
    3. This glamorizes Trump's ignorance and stupidity. From Trump's massive character deficits, no good can come, even in terms of the tear it all down and rebuild from the bottom up school of thought. Destruction is destruction and a lot of people are going to suffer. You guys need to go back to using your guns for target practice and stop fantasizing about remaking everything to suit yourselves.

      You will suffer too when there is no McDonalds on the corner and your best friend gets deported for looking vaguely dark skinned and your girlfriend has a back alley abortion and dies.

      Delete
    4. The blue media is easy to spot. They're the ones owned by corporations and hedge funds, who call holding police officers accountable "de-funding the police", and bask in the tax cuts Trump gave them.
      The sooner Trump destroys them (Day One?), the better for all of us.

      Delete
    5. Destruction is not a good thing. Why not fix the media instead of tearing it down?

      Delete
    6. "That is not the point. The point is he has been given a mandate to destroy those institutions, not change them."

      When you win an election you don't get a mandate to do whatever you want. You get a mandate to do what you campaigned on, promised to do.

      When did Trump discuss banks? Or congressional reform? Or go beyond 'concepts of a plan' for healthcare?

      Trump has a mandate to prosecute his enemies and beguile his supporters with tales of Arnold Palmer's schlong. That's about it.

      Delete
  12. Bob says we'll ruled by a "gaggle" of Donald J. Trump, Elon Musk, Robert F. Kennedy, Jr., JD Vance, and Tucker Carlson. "Gaggle" is a flock of geese. Synonyms of "goose" include ninny, doofus, ding-ding, fool, nincompoop, and lunatic. One can argue that these terms should apply to Kennedy, Carlson and Trump. But, Vance is super-smart and Musk is in another league altogether.

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. David, the irony is that we don’t really know who has ruled over us for the last four years. We know that it wasn’t Biden or Comma La.

      Delete
    2. Cecelia, that is a total lie. Are we now going to enter a four-year period where pieces of shit like you are allowed to say whatever they want without pushback? I wouldn't count on it.

      Vance may be "super-smart" as David claims, but he is majorly screwed up (borderline personality disorder), unmoored, and unethical. Musk is gonzo crazy and out of control. Trump needs to rein him in now that he has served his purpose, but he may not be able to do it. We are all in for a difficult four years, and Republicans may find out they've unleashed forces that are as destructive to themselves as to anyone else.

      You, Cecelia, serve no purpose here any more. Go crawl back under your rock. Putin no doubt has other uses for you.

      Delete
    3. Regarding Bob's "gaggle", I don't think Carlson will one of our leaders. I am appalled that RFK Jr. will have a big role in health care. I admire Vance, but VPs generally are not significant. However, Musk's ability outweighs all the others' negatives. Musk seems to be the most capable human being on the face of the earth.

      Decades ago I worked for Henry Singleton, a brilliant scientist and entrepreneur. I remember wishing that people of Singleton's caliber were running our government. Now, I am thrilled to be getting my wish.

      Delete
    4. Like we don't know who ruled us the last 4 years. It was George Soros C. Ask any QANON Trump supporter, they'll you.

      Delete
    5. Anonymouse 12:23pm, they’re not going away.

      Delete
    6. "Musk seems to be the most capable human being on the face of the earth."

      This will go way over your head, DiC, but I'll state it for others:

      people have varying capabilities and can be skilled in one area but mediocre in another. The differences between technical accomplishments such as rocket design and crafting public policy are vast, as we may soon learn.

      Delete
    7. "'Gaggle' is a flock of geese."

      You may be surprised to know that some words have more than one meaning.

      Delete
    8. True, Quaker, But, words carry an implication or aura of their main meaning, even if they're correct in some other meaning of the word. The word "gaggle" is an insult in Bob's context.

      Delete
    9. Anonymouse 11:54am, I “serve no purpose here anymore”? You do a great Joan Crawford impersonation, but I’m a just a commenter not someone who is here on a mission.

      Delete
    10. Musk hasn't designed any rocket ships. He has been entrepreneurial but he has succeeded on the backs of other talented people, often despite his own efforts. Look how he destroyed Twitter. He behaves like someone who should be talented but he is riding on the backs of other people. Betting on his success is a huge mistake.

      Delete
    11. Cecelia, you are not just another commenter. You are a very special kind of commenter called a troll. You contribute nothing to substantive discussion, spread lies, annoy other people and make yourself as annoying as possible, for no good reason. Go away.

      Delete
    12. Yes, @11:26, people have varying capabilities and can be skilled in one area but mediocre in another. Musk's unrivaled ability to manage large organizations so that they run effectively and efficiently is exactly the area in which he'll be working.

      Presidents before designated someone to improve government efficiency. E.g., the National Partnership for Reinventing Government (NPR) was a U.S. government reform initiative launched in 1993 by Vice President Al Gore. All these efforts failed. I'm not sure it's even possible, but if anyone on earth can make this happen, Musk is the one.

      Delete
    13. Musk fired everyone at Twitter, then discovered the platform couldn't run properly without technical expertise, so he had to hire them back. Meanwhile the operation of Twitter fell apart and people left. If there had been a truly competitive environment, it wouldn't have survived. Many feel it still lack integrity. Musk hurt the organization he took over.

      You can say similar things about Tesla (and David did). Musk didn't invent the EV. He bought a company already developing an EV with very little competition (at that time).

      Delete
    14. You think Musk can do the same thing he did to Twitter, Dickhead. LOL

      Delete
    15. Anonymouse 1:15pm, this blog belongs to Somerby. I am here because I enjoy his blogging. Anonymices are here because you wish to call him a pedophile, misogynist, Putin- operative, and overall weirdo. You are obviously an organized team and you do things that obviously plotted.. You are the trolls. You’re welcome.

      Delete
    16. No, you are here to count coup (you won't know what that means) and to abuse others. That's why you rarely talk about what Somerby has posted. Just now, you are blaming one person for everything you dislike that any anonymous commenter has said here about Somerby. You attribute it all to me, when I am one of several anonymous commenters here.

      This is just trouble-making and trolling for its own sake. There is no longer an election going on. No one needs to hear what you are spreading today. Go away.

      Delete
    17. I looked up "troll internet meaning" on Google, and it said:

      "An internet troll is someone who posts or comments online with the intention of upsetting others."

      Google continued: "Trolls may use a variety of tactics to achieve their goal, including:"

      And then, guess what was the very first tactic listed?

      "Posting under a fake name or anonymously"

      Delete
    18. PP, no one here except Somerby is using their actual name. According to your definition, everyone here is a troll, except that is the logical fallacy of affirming the consequent:

      If I punch you, then you will feel pain.

      You observe the pain and assume that you were punched when it should be obvious that there are many possible sources of pain besides punching.

      If you are a troll, then you will use a fake name or be anonymous.

      In this case, you assume that because someone is posting under a fake name or anonymously (the consequent), they must be a troll (the antecedent, which is being assumed when there are many other reasons for posting with a fake name or anonymously).

      But we all understand that you are not engaged in logical reasoning but name-calling, because calling other commenters names is the only thing you are capable of doing here.

      Delete
    19. You want me to call you a name? OK - you're a pedant.

      Delete
    20. pedant -- a person who is excessively concerned with minor details and rules or with displaying academic learning

      Ouch, you called me someone with academic learning! Actually anyone who has read the Bible would know the quote. Maybe you should call me someone concerned with religious meaning?

      PP, I want you to be a mensch and actually participate in discussions here (the substance, not the personalities), instead of just calling names whenever you have an emotional response to what someone has said. Try putting your feelings into words -- think about the substance that led to your reaction.

      Otherwise, you are just another useless turd on the road of life, like Cecelia.

      Delete
    21. “Ouch, you called me someone with academic learning! Actually anyone who has read the Bible would know the quote. Maybe you should call me someone concerned with religious meaning?”

      Anonymouse 2:51pm, no, PP called you a pretentious, monotonous, surly bore.

      Delete
    22. PP is nicer than you are and he didn't say what you attribute to him. You are the one who hears an innocuous complaint and escalates it out of mean-spirited feeling toward people you don't even know. You are a hater.

      Delete
    23. 2:51. "PP, I want you to be a mensch and actually participate in discussions here (the substance, not the personalities), instead of just calling names"

      "Otherwise, you are just another useless turd"

      I guess you couldn't play the mensch for very long, could you?

      Delete
    24. No one can accuse me of never discussing substantive topics here. But go ahead, be the turd.

      Delete
  13. Trump's election has already made the world a better place.
    Houthis Declare Immediate Ceasefire Against IDF as Trump Leads in U.S. Polls
    https://www.oneindia.com/videos/houthis-ceasefire-idf-trump-us-polls-011-4193494.html

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. Russia may do the same in Ukraine, waiting for Trump to take office and achieve his military goals for him without further effort. Is that a good thing? It depends on whether you live in Ukraine or not.

      Delete
    2. David, will you ever learn to use even an atom of skepticism when you come across these obvious fakes? "One India News" is the only source for this breathless report. Look a little deeper before you get too excited.

      Delete
    3. No. He won't. DiC is a con, a mark, a rube. People like Trump count on him to obtain and hold on to power.

      Delete
    4. Quaker: David falling for the obvious fake is indicative of the deep problems that we have with the low information voters; particularly, the low information voters that they think that they are knowledgeable. It's not the Trump cult that got him elected. I don't mind them so much, because they are delusional. It's the deep-thinking undecideds who produce such deep thoughts as: inflation was lower under Trump. I am concerned about the illegals voting. The economy was better under Trump. And so on. These poor souls who think that they are voting on policy, and don't realize that they have been had.

      Delete
    5. The headline on the story David linked was so exciting that the big, red flags in the lead went unnoticed:

      "Recent social media rumours suggest that the Houthis have declared a ceasefire."

      Was "One India News" reporting observable facts? No, they were reporting on "recent rumors" sourced to "social media."

      And did these rumors assert that Houthis had declared a ceasefire? No again. The "recent social media rumors" only suggest that such a thing might have happened.

      But clearly, the "recent social media rumors suggest" that Trump's victory is responsible for the supposed ceasefire. Yet again, no. The story makes no such claim. It only notes that the rumors were coincident with Trump's success in the election. No cause or effect was claimed.

      But do carry on. Everything good that transpires in the days ahead will arise from the beneficence of Great Leader.

      Delete
    6. Any average statistician knows that correlation is not causation. Then there's David.

      Delete
    7. Encountered a Trump voter last night who explained that the public was concerned about Biden’s outsized contribution to the national debt and that Harris’s role as border czar did not help her. When I told him that the republicans had wanted to impeach the border czar and that the 8 trillion dollars in debt Trump accrued was projected by some economists to be repeated based upon his stated plans, he offered no rebuttals, even remarking about Majorkis- who he apparently new all along was the border czar. They don’t mind repeating nonsense even if they know it is wrong.

      Delete
  14. All over the internet, left wing blogs and substacks are offering condolences but what is Somerby saying? He is gloating.

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. Anonymouse 11:50am, the people offering you condolences are doing that because they were wrong and they’re sad about that too. Bob wasn’t wrong and wasn’t wrong while you were in the throes of castigating him for being wrong.

      Delete
    2. Cecelia, do you consider it noble to rub salt in other people's wounds? If your child had an owwee, would you squeeze it extra hard to make it hurt more? Your famous lack of empathy is showing today.

      Vulnerable people will be hurt by Trump's efforts and you have no compassion for the very real damage Trump will do to many of us. You need to shut up and go away now.

      Delete
    3. Anonymouse 1:17pm, do you consider it noble for you to chide and castigate Somerby for being more correct than you were about the political scene?

      I don’t and I’ve countered you in that and on other things you were wrong about then and that you’re repeating now.

      It’s a blog board for everyone. It’s not a private salon for anonymices who somehow think the place has been provided for them by the person they actually deplore.

      Delete
    4. Anonymouse 1:17pm, anonymices are in the throes of anger and woundedness every day at this blog. No one need spare you today or any other day.

      Delete
    5. Like I said, you have no empathy. Like most Republicans.

      Delete
    6. Cecelia, saying that a sidewalk is a public space for everyone to walk on, doesn't permit you to hurt and abuse other people while there. You are a nasty person and you need to go away.

      Delete
    7. Anonymouse 1:58pm, actually, I’m permitted to say anything here that Bob permits.

      I haven’t called you agents to a foreign power. I haven’t said that you’re pretending to be a gender you are not. I haven’t speculated on psychic damage due to your childhood. What has permitted you to do that? I’ve called
      you paid trolls You are that.

      Now let’s sit back and see what’s happening in the House, baby.

      Delete
    8. Anonymouse 2:46pm, I have all the internal constraints that I mentioned. I haven’t accused anyone of being a pedophile. I haven’t accused anyone of working for a foreign potentate. I haven’t accused anyone of lying about their gender. I haven’t disparagingly analyzed anyone’s personal background. I haven’t accused Democrats in general of being bad people.

      Can you say anything in the same ballpark as that? You can not.

      And yes, the sole restraints I have here are my own conscience and Bob’s ability to delete me.

      Now go pull your panties out of your crack.

      Delete
    9. Push Cecelia too far and she gets predictably crude. She has no idea whether I wear panties or not, but insulting a man by attributing girly things to him is a standard right wing form of insult. Sexist, yes.

      Cecelia thinks that not calling someone a pedophile is a good thing. What if he is a pedophile? Shouldn't that be called out. But note that no one here has called Somerby that, even when he defended Roy Moore or when he oddly gushed over murdered Anne Frank's bio photo (worth the price of the book, Somerby said). I will also note that Somerby has often disparagingly analyzed people's personal backgrounds, as with Chanel Miller, Rachel Maddow and even Gutfeld.

      I have said that people who behave here with a lack of empathy turn out to be Republicans and that such lack of empathy is a diagnostic and even defining characteristic of being a right winger. I provided examples. The cruelty is the goal.

      You should kick your conscience into gear. It is going to be needed during the next four years, since Republicans will have less than usual restraint. Perhaps you can save your friends and neighbors some pain, if you care enough to do that (instead of laughing, pointing, and victim-blaming).

      You came here gratuitously to mock lefties on our day of mourning. Who does that? Not good decent people, not even nice people or people pretending to be nice. Just mean-spirited, ugly-souled, craven conservative trolls. If you aren't proud of that behavior, Cecelia, you can reform and be a better person tomorrow. The choice is yours, but nice people don't gloat.

      As a matter of trivia, gloating is forbidden by the rules of bridge and anyone doing it will be penalized during a tournament (sort of like the penalty for endzone celebration).

      If you wear panties, take a break and go wash them. I'm sure they need it.

      Delete
    10. Anonymousec 3:26pm: “what if he is a pedophile?”. Oh, that’s an interesting standard. It literally reeks of what anonymices would conveniently classify as being “logic” and logic with the added benefit of earning a living via defaming a blogger.

      I come here read Bob and coincidentally enjoy the added fun of gratuitously mocking anonymices. There is a different between mockery and pernicious slander. . There’s also a difference between my interest in this blog as to reading it and thinking about it, from your anonymouse task here. Yours is a nasty political operation that has blown up in your face this election season and left you with blaming it on Bob like you might try to salvage wood from a tree struck by lightning.

      Now go pull your panties out of your crack. If Trump isnt assassinated you’ll have a whole four years of chasing him.

      Delete
    11. There, Cecelia has admitted to enjoying mocking other commenters for fun. It's obvious, but it is also nice to hear her admit what she does here. Not calling someone a pedophile is not any kind of slander.

      I am not now and never have been a political operative. I do have political opinions, like most others here (excluding paid trolls). I blame Somerby for not helping Harris get elected, but as Quaker points out, his influence was limited. But he didn't even try.

      Please stop talking about panties. You have no idea what I wear and it is insulting when you talk about personal underwear in such an invasive way. Trump is going to die soon, as we all will eventually. He is 78. How long do obese men with poor health habits live? He is about at the end of his time on Earth, actuarily speaking (David can corroborate this). He has stopped playing golf so the end is near. Vance is a real and dangerous threat to us all, including Republicans. But you guys voted for him. We didn't.

      Delete
    12. Anonymouse 6:28pm, “admit it”? I wholeheartedly enjoy and advocate mocking anonymices. Of course I mock anonymices. If asininity was a fruit, anonymices would be the golden apple of it.
      Anonymouses prove the old saw that the meanest people have the tenderest sensibilities as to their own feelings.

      You’re a hack.

      Delete
    13. I suppose it has never occurred to you that your naked hate looks ugly to better people than yourself?

      Delete
    14. 7:25 - no, just a normal 2024 republican.

      Delete
  15. I am full of joy.

    I'm thinking of the great significance of the passage of time. Somerby is an ass.

    I am Corby.

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. Where has this schizophrenic lost soul been hiding?

      Delete
  16. It's time for Dems to acknowledge to themselves just how terrible a candidate Harris was. Her inability to do an unscripted interview without risking embarrassment is unheard of among candidates for any office. It was remarkable decline the Al Smith dinner and a Joe Rogan interview. Ordinary candidates would be thrilled to participate in those events. Her failure to define herself politically or personally was remarkable. Her strategy of "hiding the cellar" did work for Biden, so it was perhaps worth a try. But, Biden had the excuse of covid. And, Biden already had a national reputation, thanks to decades of public service.

    IMHO the Dems might have won this election with a normal candidate of ordinary ability.

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. Actually, it's not obvious that she is that stupid. It's just that her own "team" believed that she is a total idiot and kept her muzzled, thinking that was the best strategy.

      Maybe it was, but then maybe it wasn't.

      Delete
    2. Looking forward to those yummy tariffs, are you Dickhead in Cal? Any idea what sort of pain Elon has in store for us peasants?

      Delete
    3. People voted what they perceive to be their self interest. They are likely wrong about prospering under Trump. Look at all the people leaving Trump's rallies. They knew what he was but voted for him anyway. I guess the lesson is that if you tell people they can say and do anything they want, then they will follow you anywhere, as long as they don't have to sit and watch an elderly fool rant about sharks.

      This decision made by the ignorant will come back and haunt all of us. That is the down side of democracy. Harris, like Hillary, is well qualified and ran the best campaign she could, with a lot of liberal $ and grassroots canvassing. Trump didn't, but he won anyway. Clearly the rules of campaigning don't matter in the light of billionaire investment and foreign interference.

      I don't know why Harris didn't win when she was clearly the best candidate. I hate to think that so many people are so irrational that they elected Trump on purpose. Perhaps we will find out what happened in my lifetime, but meanwhile things are going to be bad for most of us, but not for the billionaires or the power-mongers on the right. None of us deserve what is coming and the smart ones among us are sad, grieving.

      Somerby rubbing it in this morning is just icing on that cake.

      What will happen when Trump finally gets too ill to fake being president, or dies? Vance will take over. Vance really is Hitler because he is smart, educated and utterly without scruples. He has a show-family and an empty soul. He can do a great deal more damage, just like Hitler was able to do, and he will be harder to stop. We may find ourselves being bombed by foreign allies while we have become the axis of evil. And we may deserve it because we let Trump back into power. I never thought I'd see this happen here.

      Those with the means should seriously consider emigrating, in my opinion. This isn't a good place to live any more.

      Delete
    4. Vance is Hitler? Hitler didn't marry a person of color.

      Delete
    5. Valid point about tariffs, @1:26. Both candidates proposed terrible policies IMO, such as Trump's tariffs. Then there was Harris's taxing unrealized capital gains. I kept telling myself that neither of them would really follow through on those insanities. We'll see.

      Delete
    6. David, Hitler was part Jewish. Being a member of a despised group doesn't innoculate someone from scapegoating that group. Psychologically, they are projecting their own deficiencies on them (via displacement) then attacking the weaknesses in others.

      You already know the phenomenon of self-hating Jews. I have no idea why Vance's wife stays with him under the circumstances. Vance's own identity is fluid and majorly confused. It is reflected by the fake bio he wrote, full of lies, and by his having changed his name four times. He is a lot like George Santos that way.

      These kinds of people appeal more to the right than the left, because the right doesn't seem to look for intellectual consistency or honesty, or track record, or anything else in their candidates that would indicate stability. Maybe they don't care about integrity and only respond to promises, or maybe just to hating on those they hate.

      These qualities in right wing politicians are easy to detect by those who vote against them, but I am baffled by those who vote for them. Do they not see what is in front of them, or do they not care?

      Delete
    7. typo: attacking their own weaknesses in others

      Delete
    8. Tariffs is a very good policy. They only way to re-industrialize the country.

      Delete
    9. An industrial economy is not as good as a digital, information-based economy. We had moved into the future but Trump wants us to drag ourselves back because the undereducated buffoons in the South think they should take unskilled worker jobs belonging to immigrants, when they cannot even spell re-industrialize (with or without the hyphen -- educated people are leaving it out these days).

      Delete
    10. You know what's good according to the right wing? Greed is good, not tariffs.

      Delete
    11. Dickhead, trump can do tariffs by executive order. These tariffs were the fucking centerpiece of his campaign. You crawled thru the gutter to vote for him, believing he won't do them?

      Yet the tax on unrealized capital gains did not have much Democratic support anyway and would have to go thru both houses of Congress and there was never any possibility that those would be passed.

      Delete
    12. "Her inability to do an unscripted interview without risking embarrassment is unheard of among candidates for any office."

      Haw!

      The candidate who defeated Harris embarasses himself every time he speaks, scripted or not.

      Delete
  17. If there is one bright spot in this travesty, we can always count on the fact that republicans are incapable of governing. Although I expect at least a couple years of Stalinesque show trials in the House.

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. Trump doled out jobs when he thought he was losing, but we have yet to see who gets to be in his cabinet. It might be Musk because he has the dough to buy a seat, but it won't be RFK Jr. because he is poor and a crackpot and even Trump's own team members don't like him.

      It will be grifters like Mnuchin, with names we've never heard of, no expertise, but willing to bail Trump out of his financial troubles. And they will make a mess of everything they touch, while Trump watches TV all day (he is too old to golf any more).

      Delete
  18. From Yastreblansky:

    "Another thing: We thought for the past two weeks or so from all the excited reporting on early voting that this was going to be a very high-turnout election, but it was the opposite: Trump won with quite a lot fewer votes than the number with which he lost to Biden in 2020; Harris got far fewer votes than that.

    2024: Trump 71,633,021 to Harris 66,802,204

    2020: Trump 74,223,975 to Biden 81,283,501

    Perhaps the Trump campaign's GOTV was as bad as we thought, but the Democratic campaign wasn't so flawless as we were led to believe, is one thing I'm thinking. I'm not really thinking that Gavin Newsom and the mini-primary would have done any better; if anything, that the whole situation was really terrible (there was some misinformation involved in the reporting on Biden's age and debate performance, by the way, of the prestige press variety; Emptywheel has a story, keyed to Bob Woodward's new book, of a reason why Biden performed so badly in that debate: things that had happened the same day plunging him down on the roller coaster of his stress and guilt over Hunter Biden' criminal conviction, for which he blamed himself—if he hadn't been president Hunter would never have been charged...).

    But the numbers show it wasn't some huge last-minute wave of support for Trump. The election wasn't a massive ideological shift, as some have called it, but a massive withdrawal, of almost 18 million voters, into the woodwork."

    https://yastreblyansky.substack.com/p/postmortem-note

    ReplyDelete
  19. How can Americans be sharp when they elected Trump?

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. I like your concision.

      Delete
    2. It could be a paradox rather than an absolute.

      Delete
  20. "Do we like other humans, or not?"

    Do we get to vote anyone off the island? I suggest Cecelia first of all, as the biggest nuisance with the least value to our collective enterprise here (or anywhere for that matter).

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. Anonymouse 4:54pm, I’m not an employee of your collective enterprise. That’s only comprised of rats.

      Delete
    2. I guess they don't have the Survivor TV show on your gulag. The excessively literal translation of "collective enterprise" in business terms is another give away that you are trolling from a farm in Eastern Europe and not a native English speaker.

      Delete
    3. Anonymouse 6:21pm, the “literal translation” of collective enterprise is what makes the statement humorous and on target as to your shared anonymouse endeavor, Einstein.

      Delete
    4. Kindness and respect, two words that Cecelia has never looked up in a dictionary and doesn't know the meaning of.

      She says, "I meant to say that" after making a language error that no English speaker would do. "I was just joking" she says, because she can never admit to a mistake. And this is why people are laughing at her, not because she make a clever or witty remark. Sucks to be you, Cecelia.

      Calling people rats is not funny either. Quit while you're behind.

      Delete
    5. Anonymouse 7:07pm, “kindness and respect” two words that anonymices mouth and demand on their own behaves, but never practice.

      Delete
    6. behaves = behalf

      Clearly the drinking hour has arrived at Cecelia's house.

      Delete
  21. Trump Trump Trump jail, says Somerby, but one consequence of this election is that Trump will not be held accountable for his many crimes. Further, he is planning to pardon the 1/6 participants who were convicted of violent crimes. Because of the Supreme Court immunity decision, Trump will feel empowered to do anything he wants, including commit more crimes.

    I guess the one I understand the least is why Trump was permitted to steal and sell classified documents, the way he did. His recklessness with state secrets endangered our own agents in Russia and elsewhere and was never addressed. Some disappeared and may have been killed because of Trump's actions. Why was that OK?

    ReplyDelete