Yes, Guys, You Actually Built This

It’s simply amazing to me that the media is sitting back and not pointing out to America that as the establishment GOP collectively loses their shit over Trump winning, they simultaneously are encouraging unprecedented obstruction of a Supreme Court appointment (although I still think they are going to fold). The latest public freak-out comes from the NRO, whose special edition anti-Trump issue a month ago probably netted Trump about 50 delegates:

It’s Time for an Anti-Trump Manhattan Project

by Charles C. W. Cooke February 24, 2016 4:51 PM

For the last eight months or so, a significant portion of the Republican party’s voters have been in thrall to a bizarre, Occupy-esque conspiracy theory, which holds as its central thesis that sabotage and pusillanimity are the root causes of the Right’s recent woes. In this mistaken view, the conservative movement’s failure to counter all of the Obama era’s excesses is not the product of the crucial democratic and structural factors that prevent any one faction from ushering in substantial change, but of a lack of will or desire. Sure, the advocates of this view will concede, the shutdown of 2013 was doomed from the start, in large part because the public sided with President Obama. But if the GOP had just held out a little longer, they imagine, the “power of the purse” would have prevailed and the popular dynamics would magically have shifted. The same insistence obtains elsewhere: Sure, there is no precedent in which a second-term president willingly repeals his centerpiece legislative achievements simply because the legislature has elected to play hardball with its powers. But somehow, the critics believe, this time would have been different. Why, they ask repeatedly, didn’t the Republican party just “fight” harder?

Given how broadly this opinion is held, one would have expected the 2016 primary season to reveal a penchant for purity that redounded to the favor of a candidate such as Ted Cruz. And yet, oddly enough, quite the opposite has happened thus far. Led by Donald Trump, the most frustrated voters have instead put their efforts behind a well-telegraphed attempt to burn down the whole political edifice and reconstruct it from scratch. Because it has been imperfect, the GOP must be destroyed.

Either they are too stupid to recognize it, or they don’t want to take the blame, or some combination of both, but they built Trump. It was decades of these stupid mother fuckers shouting about Obama being a secret Muslim or Hillary murdered Vince Foster and Dan Burton shooting a fucking watermelon to prove it to another melon based theory about Mexicans having calves the size of cantaloupes and women wanting to abort babies for shits and giggles and sending rock salt to Olympia Snowe and claiming there is no global climate change because LOOK RIGHT FUCKING HERE I HAVE A SNOWBALL IN FEBRUARY or convincing America that welfare and food stamps only go to young bucks buying t-bone steaks or welfare queens with big screen tv’s or that public transportation is totalitarianism or that the main cost cutting technique of health care reform will be Death Panels or that prison makes you gay or that man and dinosaurs lived together in harmony or that women can magically abort pregnancies created by rape or that scientists are genetically creating human/mice superbrains or that agribusiness is using aborted fetuses in soda or that if gay people marry pretty soon people will be marrying dogs or that Presidents Lincoln and Washington used electronic surveillance and actually writing, promoting, and believing a fucking book that said liberalism is fascism and running this person as a Vice Presidential candidate to claiming with no scientific evidence that vaccines cause autism.

My bad. That last one is a Democrat. Fuck you, Robert Kennedy, you fucking stain on our party and your family name.

But that list is real. I didn’t make any of it up. And that’s just a list of things they BELIEVE IN, and not a comprehensive list of the stupid shit they’ve actually done or the vile things they have said. That’s just too depressing to actually tabulate.

So yeah, Mr. Cooke, while you are calling on a Manhattan Project to defeat Trump, maybe you should sit back and reflect on just how the fuck this train got so far off the rails. If this list isn’t comprehensive enough, I’ve got another something that may convince you. Something that appeared just this fucking morning in your own god damned magazine:

gitmo

Fuck you, Charles Cooke, and every one out there like you. You made this fucking mess.

*** Update ***

Cooke responds.






190 replies
  1. 1
    Trentrunner says:

    It feels like we are at the end of the beginning of a huge upheaval.

    Everybody hang the fuck on.

    And vote. VOTE.

  2. 2
    Seebach says:

    I wish trump all of the world’s luck in destroying the Republican party, but then he needs to stop. How do you thread the needle so that the GOP dies but there is no loss of innocent life?

  3. 3
  4. 4
    jl says:

    Trump is radioactive and he glows an eerie yellow and orange. He may come from some Manhattan Project. Maybe, an accidental byproduct of mas releases of toxic waste from the political experiments of the GOP itself?

    Hey, I seen lots of stuff like this sci fi movies. It might be true.

    Edit: And I thought Burton was out shooting pumpkins in his backyard, not watermelons.

  5. 5
  6. 6
    C.V. Danes says:

    @Seebach: You let Trump destroy the GOP, and then get his dick stomped in the dirt by Hillary in the general.

  7. 7
    lamh36 says:

    I still think Donald Trump don’t wanna be nobody Prez, never did. It was just a vanity project…but now it’s too damn late and unless he just quits he can’t save face. so on he goes and then what..smh

  8. 8
    Woodrowfan says:

    the comments at the NR site are probably give Cooke nightmares. good. but they show how far it’s gone..

  9. 9
    Manyakitty says:

    Has anyone else seen the video with Putin talking about a Syrian cease-fire?

  10. 10
  11. 11
    DH says:

    Excellent Mr Cole

  12. 12
    daverave says:

    One righteous rant, JC, just righteous… but preaching to the choir often is. That R party and their minions will never, NEVER, acknowledge their culpability for anything.

  13. 13
    nutella says:

    I thought “Why not shoot them” was going to be about the R senators refusing to do hearings for Scalia’s replacement.

  14. 14
    WarMunchkin says:

    For the last eight years or so, a significant portion of the Democratic party’s voters have been in thrall to a bizarre, anti-corporatist conspiracy theory, which holds as its central thesis that sabotage and pusillanimity are the root causes of the Left’s recent woes. In this mistaken view, the progressive movement’s failure to achieve all of Democratic goals is not the product of the crucial democratic and structural factors that prevent any one faction from ushering in substantial change, but of a lack of will or desire. Sure, the advocates of this view will concede, the public option was doomed from the start, in large part because Max Baucus and Evan Bayh are preening assholes. But if the President had just spoke out a little louder, they imagine, the “power of the bully pulpit” would have prevailed and the popular dynamics would magically have shifted. The same insistence obtains elsewhere: … But somehow, the critics believe, this time would have been different. Why, they ask repeatedly, didn’t President Obama just “fight” harder?

    What? You were all thinking it.

  15. 15
    Pogonip says:

    I think we should cut off Cole’s Faulkner. Bad influence.

  16. 16
    trollhattan says:

    Jesus, That NR thing is real? Jesus. WF Buckley is probably applauding from…wherever.

    Righteous rant JC, and spot on.

  17. 17
    Lee Hartmann says:

    dear John: +1000.

  18. 18
    dr. bloor says:

    I need a cigarette.

  19. 19
    trollhattan says:

    @lamh36:
    Exatamundo, but now he’s swept up in his surprise[!] success and is running with it because the ego says “yes, yes, yes.” Lucky us.

  20. 20
    Ken says:

    @nutella: That would be illegal, and maybe even morally wrong.

  21. 21
    Scott S. says:

    You know, if you photoshopped that “Why not shoot them” page to feature pictures of the staff of the National Review, people would say you were being uncivil.

  22. 22
    jl says:

    Cole does not mention a long standing tactic of the GOP, which is to line the pockets of their rich backers by promoting crony capitalist and avaricious corporate friendly policies that grind the faces of their white dupes just enough to soften them up for the idiotic story lines that Cole lists in this post.

    I think Kristol himself, or some other thinktank bigshot (Podhoretz?) wrote about it several years ago. You grind their white dupes’ faces to soften them up for racist BS and class resentment, and distract them with national security scares. Then you use that to win elections and grind their faces a little more. And of course, you don’t really give a shit about anything much you say you care about, like social conservatism, that is just window dressing.

    How long did they think they could keep this con running? Or maybe they didn’t calibrate the intensity of their face grinding carefully enough. Sooner or later the dupes will rebel when given a chance, and Trump gave them a chance.

  23. 23
    Gravenstone says:

    @Seebach: I don’t know that you can. To me the question is whether the various factions now exploding outward from the Republican party choose to turn their weapons on Democrats (or anyone else they view as “other”), or each other for being insufficiently pure.

  24. 24
    Just Some Fuckhead says:

    TLDR Captain Words

  25. 25
    Nate Dawg says:

    @jl: What does “grind their faces” mean?

  26. 26
    Belafon says:

    They are the party of personal responsibility…other people’s personal responsibility.

  27. 27
    🌷 Martin says:

    @Trentrunner:

    It feels like we are at the end of the beginning of a huge upheaval.

    I think we are. This is the extinction burst. Let’s consider Trumps historic win in Nevada. He got 34,000 votes, or just shy of 50% of the vote. There are 493,000 registered republicans in Nevada (70,000 American Independent) and 1.4M registered voters total. So Trump landed 2% of the Nevada electorate and somehow this is evidence of his unstoppability.

    It’s not just the lack of engagement by the electorate but the fact that the media cannot stop overreading everything around it. The public is completely out of phase with the politics of this country. You can see that in the constant pandering around the NRA on policies that 90% of the electorate oppose.

    Something is going to give, and big.

  28. 28
    seaboogie says:

    It’s all id and ragegasm on the GOP side, and corporate click-bait/greed on the media side, and no accountability for either. “Government” as the root of all evil is the pig that they are poking, and governance as a necessary ideal is left to the Dems.

    Also, pig in a poke means something else, but it also kind of works on that level too.

  29. 29
  30. 30
    NR says:

    @C.V. Danes: Trump can definitely beat Hillary, and anyone who thinks he can’t is far too naive for their own good.

  31. 31
    chopper says:

    your second paragraph is perfect, john. I wanna gay marry it.

  32. 32
    jl says:

    @Nate Dawg: Isaiah 3:15:

    What mean ye that ye beat my people to pieces, and grind the faces of the poor? saith the Lord GOD of hosts.

    Edit: if more explanation needed, to make life more difficult for anybody not rich, so they will be angry and susceptible to GOP attempts to lay blame on intellectuals, hippies, brown and black people, kids, liberals, whoever is convenient to blame in order to win elections and then repeat the treatment.

  33. 33
    MomSense says:

    We just have to dig in now, keep our wits, and win this election. It is going to take a lot of work because the Republicans will have to crank the fear all the way up to have a shot with one of the remaining jerks.
    I just hope that if you are campaigning for your preferred Democratic candidate, you try not to disparage the Democratic Party or our president. We don’t need to reinforce the Republican message.

  34. 34
    trollhattan says:

    @🌷 Martin:

    Something is going to give, and big.

    Hopefully not my colostomy bag. [express mail: Reince Priebus, Washington, D.C.]

  35. 35
    the Conster, la Citoyenne says:

    The core Republican values are willful ignorance (science denialism and every other kind of reality denialism) and racism. It’s pretty fucking simple. Let’s make sure we all vote against that on November 8.

  36. 36
    Svensker says:

    Went over to NRO earlier today to see how they’re handling the Rubio/Cruz dudathon and saw the “why not shoot them” article. Had to shut down my computer and go look at the sky for a while.

    Righteous rant, Cole. Too bad it’s necessary.

  37. 37
    Rommie says:

    So this is the Wingnut Event Horizon – it’s full of Dumb!

    I hope whenever a Justice League movie meets Green Lantern for the first time, they beat the hell out of him. Just Damn Because.

  38. 38
    WarMunchkin says:

    @🌷 Martin:

    I think we are. This is the extinction burst.

    Peak wingnut, part 5435235234524?

    Something is going to give, and big.

    There is only one givable something, and that’s the Democratic coalition. It either shows up or it does not. Reasons it does not include believing that there is no contrast between the two parties or believing that the top-level candidate has character flaws. Reasons it does include a robust national GOTV infrastructure or sense of civic responsibility.

  39. 39
    TK_1 says:

    They did build this, and you know what? They don’t even give a f#ck. So long as they get their tax cuts every 5 minutes the right wing is satisfied.

  40. 40
    Calouste says:

    New Texas poll out, Trump and Cruz share the lead with 32%, Rubio third with 17%, which would see him get exactly 0 of Texas’s 155 delegates.

  41. 41
    Mike J says:

    Trump is the worstest thing evar!

    But they still won’t vote for Hillary.

  42. 42
    WereBear says:

    Beautiful! Of course, no one rants like our own John Cole.

    The GOP has been training their voters to accept idiocy for decades now. I am completely unsurprised.

  43. 43
    Calouste says:

    From the Guardian live blog:

    Republican presidential frontrunner Donald Trump participated in a question-and-answer session at Regent University in Virginia Beach earlier today, and discussed his hopes for a potential running mate, saying he wanted someone who could “help me with government”.
    Trump acknowledged that he does not have a background in “legislation”, and said he had five names he was now considering as possible running mates.

    Points for unexpected self-awareness, but I shudder to think who those five names are. Joe Scarborough? Paul Ryan? Louie Gohmert?

  44. 44
    Keith P. says:

    I read an article yesterday (maybe on Politico?) that actually floated the possibility of the GOP going Murkowski and pushing a 3rd party candidate instead of their own. Wouldn’t that be a trip?

  45. 45
    raven says:

    @Calouste: Rachel reported that Bob McDonald was there and the last thing he needs was a “businessman” running his mouth about how tight he was with politicians.

  46. 46
    dmsilev says:

    A ‘Manhattan Project’, eh? Assemble the best and brightest of American and European academics, put them under the organizational umbrella of an agency of the US Government, and give both the agency and the academics access to huge resources with the aim of accomplishing something great (and terrible).

    Yeah, that sounds *exactly* like Yet Another Conservative SuperPAC or whatever.

  47. 47
    Technocrat says:

    Righteous!

    That list though…the thing is, I work around conservatives. Some of them are really smart people, and they build amazing things. But they do believe things like Obama taxing Christmas trees because he hates Christmas. I tend to brush it off.

    And then I see that list, and think about the full scope of some of the stuff the Right takes as a given – and I realize that some of my coworkers are probably functionally insane.

    It’s more than a little disturbing. Thank god we tend to avoid politics.

  48. 48
    jl says:

    @dmsilev: Substitute ‘reactionary PR hackwork’ for ‘nuclear physics’ and I can see parallels.

  49. 49
    NobodySpecial says:

    @NR: Trump ‘can’ beat Clinton in the sense that a pickup team CAN beat professionals – all it takes is some weapons grade bullshit. Trump is the ONLY candidate in the election with supposedly worse unfavorables than Clinton, and no one’s even TRIED to lay a glove on him yet with any seriousness. Yet he’s supposed to do better among whites than Reagan did? Suuuuuure. Pull the other one, it’s got bells on.

  50. 50
    Nate Dawg says:

    Heard on TV today that Establishment is hoping to push “their people” into the administration and gain control and leverage that way.

    Seems like they are in Bargaining phase.

  51. 51
    gene108 says:

    The only reason any Republican is aghast, clutching their pearls, and getting ready to pass out on their fainting couches is because they are worried Trump might hurt them in down ticket races.

    He may say something so nasty that when it is being contrasted to the rational statements from Hillary or Bernie, the stark contrast will turn off many voters and Democrats will use that against opponents down ticket.

    Part of the reason Trump’s comments are sliding through is because every other Republican says stuff that is just as nasty. They just try to dress it up more.

    There is a contrast in style, but not in substance, therefore there’s very little for people to look at Trump’s comments – at least in the media – and say, “he’s off his rocker”.

    Hopefully Trump will turn into “legitimate rape” Akin for the entire Republican Party this year.

  52. 52
    jl says:

    Dr. Strangelove – Mein Führer… I CAN WALK !!
    https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ww7WlSPi9gc

  53. 53
    dmsilev says:

    @jl: You make a reasonable point. Also, consider the fringe benefits: We would be taking a whole bunch of conservative PR hacks and sticking them out in the middle of nowhere with extremely limited (and censored) communications with the outside world. That, in and of itself, is a win.

  54. 54
    NotMax says:

    Left out is the religious preacher nutball Trump supporter who insists Starbuck’s puts semen into lattes to make us all gay.

  55. 55
    Mike J says:

    For everyone who laughs at the idea of Trump being elected, many people laughed at the idea of Agnew being VP. It doesn’t matter that in the end they were right. The damage was done.

  56. 56
    Howard Beale IV says:

    @Calouste: Rick Scott–I shit you not.

  57. 57
    pseudonymous in nc says:

    Taibbi talked about ‘tweedy Buckleyites’ in his RS piece on Trump as King Conman. Cooke is apparently a British import, one of the damp Thatcherite nonsenses who moved to the US for some wingnut welfare.

  58. 58
    cthulhu says:

    @NR:

    Trump can definitely beat Hillary, and anyone who thinks he can’t is far too naive for their own good.

    I don’t think Trump’s lazy swagger works so well in the general. I don’t see millennials voting THAT ironically, well unless the short fingered vulgarian somehow convinces Jon Stewart to be his running mate.

    Sadly, though, it will be too close in an any case, making a statement regardless.

  59. 59
    Spanky says:

    Right On Brother!!! I just wish the bastards gave a shit.

  60. 60
    TK_1 says:

    Saw a commercial from the “Club for Growth” tonight where they dug up a clip of Trump from 2004 saying “in many ways I’m probably more like a Democrat.”

  61. 61
    Warren Terra says:

    to claiming with no scientific evidence that vaccines cause autism.

    My bad. That last one is a Democrat. Fuck you, Robert Kennedy, you fucking stain on our party and your family name.

    Yes, Robert Kennedy is a disgrace – but the Republicans have their own anti-vax problem. The Human Papilloma Virus vaccine (which is probably responsible for a 2/3 reduction in HPV infection, and will save a lot of young women from cervical cancer) scares conservatives because it involves talking honestly to their daughters about the nonzero possibility they will have premarital intercourse, and because they like the idea that sex should be incredibly dangerous. As the wingers furiously denounced the imposition of offering girls a free HPV vaccine, I think false autism claims made an appearance; I recall some of the 2012 primary candidates appearing to give support to those notions (Bachmann, I think? Maybe others?)

  62. 62
    jl says:

    Mel Brooks’ Young Frankenstein – “Whose Brain I did put in?”
    https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=yH97lImrr0Q

  63. 63
    Kropadope says:

    @NobodySpecial:

    Trump is the ONLY candidate in the election with supposedly worse unfavorables than Clinton

    I keep hearing that, but I know a lot of people who are really excited about Trump and, despite my best efforts, merely one person who would even consider Clinton. Obviously, the people I know aren’t a representative sample, but this is in frickin Massachusetts.

  64. 64
    cthulhu says:

    @gene108:

    The only reason any Republican is aghast, clutching their pearls, and getting ready to pass out on their fainting couches is because they are worried Trump might hurt them in down ticket races.

    There’s another reason, which Trump has certainly shown on the campaign trail: he’s a total wildcard policy-wise. He gives not a crap about conservative goals or ideology. If he is elected, their best hope is infiltration rather than top-down control. About the only thing I would confidently predict from a Trump administration is that the level of corruption will out-do every other reaching back at least as far as Harding.

  65. 65
    Matt McIrvin says:

    @Warren Terra: I just saw a long pro-Trump rant in a Google+ comment thread that praised Trump for warning us about “poison vaccines” (along with the “Muslin problem”).

    Anti-vaxxerism turns out to be fairly nonpartisan, if I recall the statistics correctly.

  66. 66
    bluehill says:

    Cole is getting into game shape for the election season!

    A revolution is upon us and it’s going to happen at the ballot box, fortunately. The “intellectual” conservatives are shocked that their base doesn’t really believe in their principles. Hahaha! The rubes are waking up and it’s not that complicated. They want “free stuff” too, but they don’t want the “others” to have it.

    You guys helped create this with “scholarly” research justifying the policies that your base is now rising up against and now you’re shocked. I hope you weren’t that naive. If so, your rich benefactors played you as well.

    As for the 1%, they’re beginning to realize that they’ve been made and are starting to save their money. Rubio’s PAC hasn’t raised that much after ! dropped out. Adelson supposedly hasn’t been giving to PACs and I think the Kochs are focusing more on state and local elections. These guys are realizing which way the wind is blowing and it’s right through Trump’s comb over.

  67. 67
    WereBear says:

    @Kropadope: The ones I know who are excited about Trump think that I’m the stupid one for taking it all seriously. Don’t I realize it’s all a big Reality Show? That government works the way the tide goes in and out?

  68. 68
    Peale says:

    @NotMax: omg. That was the plot of a Filipino movie. Why would anyone think that was real?

  69. 69
    BillinGlendaleCA says:

    @NotMax: Saw that on the Daily Show last night, ewww.

  70. 70
    Howard Beale IV says:

    Trump lit the hidden thermite that was buried in the GOP, and they can’t put it out. The staff at NRO needs to be darted with Prolixin-stat. Then maybe they’ll realize the damage they are doing to their own movement and start a much needed purge.

    (Ahh, what the fuck am I kidding? That’s like getting the Fonz to admit he was wroooo…)

  71. 71
    Kropadope says:

    @WereBear: It’s astonishing. When I raise all the awful things Trump is saying, the typical Trump supporter response is “he won’t be able to do any of that anyway.”

    The same is true of Clinton and Sanders, but somehow it’s only a negative with regard to Sanders.

  72. 72
    jl says:

    @Kropadope: For what it’s worth, in polling, Trump does less well against HRC in general than others. I think Rubio and Kasich would have much better chance in general than Trump.

    Huffington Post Pollster: general election
    http://elections.huffingtonpos.....l-election

    Everyone does less well against Sanders, but then, Sanders is not as well known among general voters as HRC, so not sure how much that means.

    I truly hate and loathe any of these goofs having a chance to be President (Romney stands like a colossus above them in competence and sanity, which is a disgusting thought, but here we are). But I think Rubio and Kasich would have a far better chance to win. And I don’t think Trump’s act would wear as well with most general voters. His BS about getting ‘top people’ and a good veep to help him out of his rank ignorance, and his ignorance about national security and foreign affairs won’t look good against HRC (or Sanders).

    The GOP primary is kind of hothouse designed for strange and exotic blooms. Not sure how they will last outside of that specialized environment.

  73. 73
    Steve in the ATL says:

    @NotMax:

    Left out is the religious preacher nutball Trump supporter who insists Starbuck’s puts semen into lattes to make us all gay.

    Is there a Christian fundamentalist anywhere who is not a closeted homosexual?

  74. 74
    Seebach says:

    @Kropadope: Some people are allegedly excited for Hillary, and I don’t disagree that she can beat him, but it’s going to be a nasty battle.

    Thinking Trump means it’s an automatic Dem win means ignoring Reagan, Schwartzenegger, and Bush W

  75. 75
    ellennelle says:

    just …stunning. i’d only add that your ‘impressive’ list did not go back far enough, to lee atwater, the southern strategy, nixon’s sabotage of johnson’s cease fire, HW’s sabotage of carter’s hostage deal, iran-contra (these last 3 all treason), reagan’s philadelphia MS announcement, willie horton, all the clinton year nonsense, impeachment, …the category until itself of bush/cheney….

    all these leaving out all the cia crimes from mosadegh forward….

    the entire shebang about the business of crippling government so it can be dragged to the bathtub and drowned. along comes katrina and biblical floods, and drought, but global warming is fraud.

    even more stunning, though, is cooke’s response to you. classic classy. every day another exact match to the french elite of the late 18th century, ironically having funded our own revolution, even more ironically getting beheaded while we quietly collected slaves.

    gads, ‘civilization’ itself the biggest irony of all. save, maybe, humanity.

    (double entendre intended there.)

    thx, john; love it when you post.

  76. 76
    Cpl. Cam says:

    @C.V. Danes: After eight years of peace and prosperity under Clinton I thought Gore stomping the shit out of W. was a no-brainer. Now I put nothing past the American public. Nothing.

  77. 77
    Steve in the ATL says:

    @ellennelle: Damn, woman, that is a righteous, and information-packed, rant as well

  78. 78
    roricmcc says:

    Well done, John! And to think your list is only a sample…

  79. 79
    Garbo says:

    Damn, man! I feel like I just snorted wasabi. Righteous!

  80. 80
    John Cole says:

    Just added “Impressively dumb. Congratulations” to the rotating tagline.

  81. 81
    a hip hop artist from Idaho (fka Bella Q) says:

    @Calouste: Rafael Cruz must be fuming that he’s tied in Texas. It’s delicious, but that’s the only part about Trump’s domination of the primary season that is.

    Cruz worried me the most because he’s not only insane, he’s actually bright. But he does seem to repulse even Republicans who get close to him.

  82. 82
    jl says:

    @Seebach: Who is saying that defeating Trump would be automatic or easy? Serious question, I don’t know who that would be.

    Current polling suggests that he would be easier to defeat than Rubio or Kasich, but that doesn’t mean it would be easy, or that having a guy like that running in the general is not very scary.

  83. 83
    pseudonymous in nc says:

    @cthulhu:

    I don’t see millennials voting THAT ironically

    I don’t see millennials voting, though. Even in a presidential year, not in the numbers that are needed to offset the Trumpenproletariat.

  84. 84
    NR says:

    @NobodySpecial: Head over to Nate Silver’s Swing-O-Matic and see for yourself. Reduce black turnout to 2004 levels (56%) and move the non college-educated whites marker just six points to the right. See what happens.

    I don’t think people have a grasp on just how much a very small % change in the non college-educated white vote will change the election. And that’s without increasing their turnout at all, by the way. If their turnout goes up too, Trump could potentially win in a landslide.

  85. 85
    Technocrat says:

    “impressively dumb”

    That’s some scathing wit right there. Where’s the nearest burn clinic, cuz somebody got COOKEd.

  86. 86
    khead says:

    @John Cole:

    I’m left to wonder what planet Mr. Cooke lives on.

    Edit – My cats have more sense.

  87. 87
    Kropadope says:

    @pseudonymous in nc: According to the polling I’ve seen, while the overall voting in D primaries is down, the number of young voters has increased from the 08 primaries.

  88. 88
    SFAW says:

    @a hip hop artist from Idaho (fka Bella Q):

    even Republicans who get close to him.

    Good one!

    About the only Republican who would “get close to him” is his wife. And his padre, assuming that cabron is actually now an American. .

  89. 89
    Seebach says:

    @NR: Trump winning in a landslide would be a fitting end to America, poetic justice and all that, no?

    But damn you just can’t let innocent people suffer like that.

  90. 90
    oklahomo says:

    My favorites were the great Granite Countertop fiasco and the sand box experiments to prove a Bradley armored vehicle couldn’t be used to run over a dog.

  91. 91
    SFAW says:

    @NR:

    Reduce black turnout to 2004 levels (56%)

    Don’t worry, Tariq Aziz [sic] over at Melanoid.Com has that covered.

  92. 92
    I'mNotSureWhoIWantToBeYet says:

    Righteous post, JC. It seems to be a good day for sensible posts from our side.

    There’s some HRC advocacy in the excerpt below, but that’s not the main point.

    Lowkell at BlueVirginia:

    […]

    We as Democrats need to come to the realization that a major problem with America today is that a minority of (angry) people who hold (far-right) ideological views are voting for the candidates who now, incredibly, make up a majority of elected offices.

    Fantasizing about adopting the policies of Denmark or Finland or some other country that is much smaller, more homogeneous, healthier, and more educated than we are is counterproductive. We have a candidate we can get behind. Hillary Clinton isn’t the lesser of two evils. She’s the smartest person in the room. She isn’t perfect, but she’s malleable — she can be moved towards the left. Republicans are intractable. They won’t move, even if reams of evidence to the contrary (e.g., on climate science) exist. Even if 90% of the electorate wants something like universal background checks, or increases in the minimum wage, Republicans look into the eyes of the Koch Brothers or Sheldon Adelson, and they have to say no.

    No more pouting. Let’s vote for people who can pass laws that will move the country forward into the 21st Century. And if you elect Democrats and they aren’t responding to your concerns, then call their offices and request they vote for issues you find important. At least they’ll listen. Republicans already decided how they are going to vote, regardless of facts, reality, or evidence; if in any doubt, they just check with their wealthy and big corporate donors and ask them what they should do.

    This election isn’t about Donald Trump, Ted Cruz, or Marco Rubio. It isn’t even about Mitch McConnell, or Paul Ryan. It starts with your members of the General Assembly, your County Board or City Council member. All politics starts in your backyard. To paraphrase the slogan of this blog, what you need to do is clear and simple: “think globally, act locally.” Get involved, not just every four years but EVERY year, and of course exercise your precious right to vote every time you can — not just in presidential years. In the end, that’s the only realistic way we’re going to get the “revolution” we want in this country.

    Well said.

    Cheers,
    Scott.

  93. 93
  94. 94
    debbie says:

    You left out the proclamation from 2012 affirming that African Americans had it better under slavery than they do with Obama. That’s at the heart of this: Racism. All this other crackpot stuff is their casting about, trying to cloak their racism in what they hope will be seen as respectability.

  95. 95
    Seebach says:

    I’m sure everyone’s read the Taibbi article but read it anyway:

    http://www.rollingstone.com/po.....24?page=13

  96. 96
    Steve in the ATL says:

    @liberal: Question for the alleged Democrats who hate Hillary so much: is she not one of the most accomplished women in the history of the United States? Follow up question: are you aware that the allegation that Hillary is a tool of Wall Street was created and propagated by Karl Rove?

    Besides the new idiots who are posting on BJ, I see it in my FB feed too. There was a Greenpeace post today bitching about Hillary. Cool that you love Bernie, guys, fine that you even prefer him to her, but have you thought about how much worse ANY republican would be than Hillary? And have you looked at some of her past proposals–including finance related ones– to see what she actually stands for? Obviously you haven’t, because she has put out some real anti-Wall Street, economic populist stuff.

    So get your heads out of your asses and do what’s best for you, your country, and your planet, and vote for whichever Democrat is nominated. Repeat this process until such time as the Democratic party is considered a fringe rightwing group and we have some real and viable social democrats to vote for.

  97. 97
    SFAW says:

    @I’mNotSureWhoIWantToBeYet:

    Republicans already decided how they are going to vote, regardless of facts, reality, or evidence;

    I get any number of e-mails asking me to “Sign this petition to tell the Republicans in Congress (or Mitch McConnell, or Paul Ryan, or Grassley or take-your-pick) to STOP OBSTRUCTING XYZ (or stop defunding Planned Parenthood or take-your-pick).”

    I delete them all, for exactly the reason that Scott quoted above. Why should I bother my beautiful mind (so to speak) trying to get the fanatics in the Rethug Partei to do something rational and responsible? I might as well set my throne by the sea and command the waves to stop.

  98. 98
    japa21 says:

    Great post John.

    Could Trump beat Clinton. Of course it is within the realm of possibility though not likely.

    Would Trump beat Sanders? That moves into the realm of possibility with increased likelihood.. I hope that wouldn’t be the case, but I believe it is true.

  99. 99
    SFAW says:

    @Steve in the ATL:

    Steve –
    “liberal” is a troll, you should save your energy.

  100. 100
    Kay says:

    @NR:

    Well, but you could move the college white marker over to the left and those voters have much better turnout than non-college so Clinton wouldn’t be depending on massive turnout. They vote. Or, you could move the Hispanic marker left to where Trump’s polling is and see what happens then.

    He still has to pull quite a bit of white voter support from the Democrat or increase his share of nonwhite voters or find a lot of “missing” white working class voters.

  101. 101
    Steve in the ATL says:

    @SFAW: I know, I was just getting the bilious version out so I can post something less overtly hostile on FB!

  102. 102
    Princess says:

    Cooke is just jealous that all the commenters on Cole’s post are witty and erudite, while all the comments on his post are written by racist, anti-semitic bottom feeders.

  103. 103
    Kropadope says:

    @Steve in the ATL:

    Question for the alleged Democrats who hate Hillary so much: is she not one of the most accomplished women in the history of the United States?

    She has certainly done a great job getting herself into the halls of power. she hasn’t however, had a great record of using her position to improve the lives of average Americans. Her list of actual accomplishments is pretty slim and the most of the really significant ones are decidedly pretty negative.

    And I don’t love Bernie, personally, but I will settle for him. Easier to hold one’s nose when the stench isn’t quite as bad.

  104. 104
    cthulhu says:

    @SFAW:

    The only reason any Republican is aghast, clutching their pearls, and getting ready to pass out on their fainting couches is because they are worried Trump might hurt them in down ticket races.

    I look at it a different way. Yes, “petitioning” the GOP to stop being asshats is a lost cause and I never bother signing such things but these same people are often on the bubble of doing something more significant. Not a bad time to reply with a nudge to volunteer/donate to an truly effective group.

  105. 105
    Kay says:

    @NR:

    I just think it’s kind of narrow, if his whole thing depends on white working class voters. He has to pull them from Clinton or increase their turnout. She has several avenues to go even if does that- increase share of white college, increase share/turnout of Latino, increase AA turnout from 2004 levels.

    I think I’d rather be the person with several possible routes than the person with one.

  106. 106
    japa21 says:

    @Kropadope: Other than the Iraq war vote, which wasn’t a vote for the war itself but was still a poor decision, which of her significant accomplishments were “decidedly pretty negative”?

  107. 107
    Just One More Canuck says:

    @NR: is there any reason to assume that either of those things might happen?

  108. 108
  109. 109
    pseudonymous in nc says:

    Ah, Chuckle Cooke is 31, and presumably not a US citizen, just a tweedy Tory boy sucking on Jonah’s wingnut tits.

  110. 110
    Mike in NC says:

    In 2020 the GOP will nominate for president somebody who thought Ted Cruz wasn’t a True Conservative.

  111. 111
    Mike J says:

    @japa21: Decorating the Christmas tree with dildos and murdering Vince Foster.

  112. 112
    Steve in the ATL says:

    @Mike J: Good point. I understand she was also the mastermind behind stealing all the “W” keys from White House computers when her hillbilly husband’s terms ended.

  113. 113
    japa21 says:

    @Mike J: Damn, I forgot those two.

  114. 114
    pluege says:

    Cole, how could you forget: ‘Saddam Hussein has WMDs and was behind 9/11?

    today’s republicans are the shit-stain on humanity’s undergarments. A total embarrassment to the human species.

  115. 115
    gogol's wife says:

    @John Cole:

    A badge of honor!

  116. 116
    Kropadope says:

    @japa21: Bankruptcy bill, PATRIOT Act, the laundry list of lies she spewed in her 08 campaignabout Obama which the Republicans retained and never let go, her repetition of the same WRT Bernie in this election, her aggressive pushing for more war in the ME throughout her tenure in the Obama administration, should I continue?

  117. 117
    Kay says:

    @NR:

    There were really two GOP theories after 2012- they had to increase their share of the nonwhite vote or increase their share/turnout of white working class- the “missing” white voters. Rubio is the candidate of the first theory and Trump is the candidate of the second theory.

  118. 118
    NR says:

    @Kay: Actually, if you look at the 538 site, you’ll see that increasing Hispanic turnout doesn’t help the Dems very much in the Electoral College. The problem is that they’re mostly concentrated in non-competitive states like California and Texas. And you have to increase both their turnout and their % voting Democratic to wildly unrealistic levels (even against Trump) to have a chance of flipping Arizona or Texas.

    Good Hispanic turnout makes it easier to hold Florida, but Trump can actually win without Florida if he wins Ohio, Pennsylvania, Iowa, Wisconsin, and Minnesota. And the non college-educated white vote is huge in those states.

  119. 119
    Steve in the ATL says:

    @NR: Trump win Ohio, Pennsylvania, Iowa, Wisconsin, and Minnesota? Good one!

  120. 120
    NR says:

    @Just One More Canuck: I think Trump’s focus on trade and immigration puts the entire Midwest except for Illinois at risk. Obama won 36% of the non college-educated white vote in 2012, in large part by successfully portraying Romney as out of touch (though he had a big assist from Romney on this). I think beating Trump will rely not on portraying him as embarrassing or crazy, but as a Romney-style fraud–i.e., just another rich asshole who only pretends to care about the working class. But that’s going to be a hell of a lot easier said than done.

  121. 121
    japa21 says:

    Lies in campaigns are normal. Hell even Bernie does it. I dsidn’t like them in 2008 either. Obama lied in 2008 and 2012. So that is rather a silly thing.

    She was hardly pushing for war in the ME during her tenure as SoS. She was perhaps more aggressive than others, though much less so than even many other Dems in Congress and definitely less so than any of the GOP.

    But I won’t convince you, so I won’t try. There is no perfect candidate out there and there never will be.

    I just happen to think she would do a lot less damage and a lot more good for the country than any other candidate running which, ultimately, is the main question at issue.

  122. 122
    Omnes Omnibus says:

    @Steve in the ATL: If he takes all five of those, he’ll probably take CA and MA as well. So fuck it.

  123. 123
    Omnes Omnibus says:

    @NR: Beating Trump involves laughing at him. And making him a laughing stock.

  124. 124
    Steve in the ATL says:

    @Omnes Omnibus: Yeah, might be a good time to audit the vote counts as well!

  125. 125
    superpredators4hillary says:

    Trump is running a fifty-state tragedy.

  126. 126
    NR says:

    @Steve in the ATL: Analysis from the 538 site. I increased turnout among non college-educated whites to 70%, and gave Trump 70% of their votes, 8% better than Romney did in 2012. I also increased (as a backlash against Trump) Hispanic turnout by 10% and gave the Dems 80% of their votes, and increased Asian/Other by 10% and gave the Dems 75% of their votes. I left the black vote and the college-educated white vote the same.

    The final numbers were:

    College-educated whites: 56%R, 44%D, 77% turnout
    Non college-educated whites: 70%R, 30%D, 70% turnout
    Blacks: 93%D, 7%R, 66% turnout
    Hispanic/Latino: 80%D, 20%R, 58% turnout
    Asian/Other: 75%D, 25%R, 59% turnout

    The result? The Dems win the popular vote 49.6% to 48.7%. But the kicker is, the Dems only win 274 electoral votes in that scenario, and those just barely. OH (R+4), IA (R+4), NH (R+3) WI (R+2), and PA (R+0.1) all flip. The Dems barely hold on to FL (D+2), MI (D+2), VA (D+1.8), and CO (D+2). The tipping point state? MN, at D+0.4. In that scenario, Trump would certainly contest the state and probably win it, and thus the presidency. Trump’s message on trade and immigration, and his focus on non college-educated whites, could put the entire Midwest except Illinois in danger.

    Now it’s certainly possible that the Dems could increase their vote share among college-educated whites. But it’s also possible that black turnout could drop since Obama won’t be on the ticket. The Dems can still win, but it’s far from the slam-dunk sure thing a lot of you seem to think it is. We underestimate Trump at our peril.

  127. 127
    Technocrat says:

    @Kropadope:

    W.R.T. the bankruptcy bill, she got it killed once, and (according to Liz Warren) got Bill to veto it when it passed. The third time it came up, she voted for it but it didn’t pass. You could argue whether the third time was tactical or not (presumably she can count votes), but as far as actual “accomplishments”: She killed that bill, twice.

  128. 128
    NR says:

    @Omnes Omnibus: Yeah, we tried that against George W. Bush. How’d it work out?

  129. 129
    Kay says:

    @NR:

    if he wins Ohio, Pennsylvania, Iowa, Wisconsin, and Minnesota. And the non college-educated white vote is huge in those states.

    I actually agree with you that Democrats are more vulnerable in the Great Lakes states than “people think” (everyone besides me, I mean, by “people”) but Wisconsin and Minnesota are really different than Ohio and Pennsylvania is different than all three of the others. Basing what would be a rout on white working class voters either abandoning Clinton in levels they didn’t come near with Obama or increasing turnout of a group of people where only half of them vote seems excessively pessimistic.

    There’s just a lot of hype right now, most of it coming from Trump. He’s now claiming Latino voters based on a Nevada GOP caucus and that was a tiny group of people. The “missing white working class” wasn’t the most popular theory in 2012- increase share of nonwhite was- but it was popular among Ohio Republicans because they need it to be true. Is Clinton really going to see a huge drop off in white voters when Obama didn’t?

  130. 130
    eemom says:

    Will you marry me, John Cole?

    This final flourish

    to claiming with no scientific evidence that vaccines cause autism.

    My bad. That last one is a Democrat. Fuck you, Robert Kennedy, you fucking stain on our party and your family name.

    proves that we are SO fucking soulmates.

    (Yes, I’m already married, but eedad is cool with polyandry. Someone else to take out the garbage.)

  131. 131
    Omnes Omnibus says:

    @NR: I mean literally laughing at him. By the Dem candidate. At a debate.

  132. 132
    Steve in the ATL says:

    @Technocrat: Please spare us the bullshit. The only thing that matters is that she is not a rainbow-shitting unicorn like Bernie. And maybe Trump; he’s obviously my second choice after Bernie.

  133. 133
    NR says:

    @Kay: I agree Trump winning Hispanics is bullshit. I predict he’ll do worse with them than Romney did, and turnout will probably be higher (though I don’t know how much).

    As for the rest, though, Obama was able to win 36% of working-class whites by portraying Romney as out of touch, which I’m sure led many of them to stay home on election day. It remains to be seen if we can do that with Trump. He’s certainly given us a lot of ammunition (a “small loan of a million dollars”), but Hillary is not nearly as good a campaigner as Obama was. And I think someone who made over $100 million in speaking fees is going to have a much harder time connecting to working-class voters than Obama did.

  134. 134
    Steve in the ATL says:

    @NR: For all her flaws, Hillary has a huge, huge, HUUUUUUGE advantage over Obama: she’s not black. The last eight years have proven just how racist this country still is.

  135. 135
    NR says:

    @Steve in the ATL: That cuts both ways, though. It’s highly doubtful she’ll get as high a turnout from black voters as Obama did.

  136. 136
    cthulhu says:

    @NR:

    The tipping point state? MN, at D+0.4. In that scenario, Trump would certainly contest the state and probably win it, and thus the presidency.

    Doesn’t take into account MN’s relatively good post-crash economic success under a Dem gov and admin. Even the white working class have a sense of it there. So they, especially, would be taking a serious risk that Trump has a better solution for them.

    If the scenario requires swinging MN, I just don’t see it.

  137. 137
    Kay says:

    @NR:

    Obama was able to win 36% of working-class whites by portraying Romney as out of touch, which I’m sure led many of them to stay home on election day.

    Obama definitely portrayed Romney as out of touch and that did help him with white working class voters who generally vote for Democrats. I laugh at all the shock at Sanders populist campaign because Obama ran on unequivocally populist campaign against Romney in this state in 2012.

    I don’t think I underestimate Trump. I just don’t know what’s real and what’s not yet. GOP primaries have nothing in common with a general election and no one has attacked Trump yet. Republicans are afraid of him for some unknown reason. I don’t think Clinton or Sanders will be afraid of him.

  138. 138
    Kropadope says:

    @japa21: @japa21: I mean, I’ll vote for her in the GE when it comes down to it. I didn’t even do that for Kerry. I’m worried about all the typical Dem voters I know who won’t vote for her, though. My sister is adamant about writing in Bernie, my buddy is considering her but will vote for Rubio if he’s nominated, my friend who’s all about unions is for Trump for some reason.

    Lies in campaigns are normal. Hell even Bernie does it. I dsidn’t like them in 2008 either. Obama lied in 2008 and 2012. So that is rather a silly thing.

    It’s not just the lies; it’s the frequency, the selection, and the credulity with which they’re treated in the media.

    Frequency: She keeps ’em coming while outside of election season. A major part of the issue with the Iraq War vote is that those lies, which originated with the Bush admin of course, didn’t hold up to much scrutiny. I knew why the case for war didn’t hold up and she had more information available to her than I did. She had to have known full well that the “mobile weapons labs” were weather stations and the aluminum tubes Iraq got weren’t adequate for nuclear bomb development. she went along anyway, because it was the line the media pushing and it was easy, which gets us to…

    Selection: the lies she’s picks are the ones already propagated by or ones she made that were of a piece with the MSM-Republican (but I repeat myself) false conventional wisdom. She wants to ensconce us firmly within the alternate world bubble the Republicans live in and play the part of the left side of the debate. This lends her MSM

    Credulity: This particular class of lies is ignored when not outright supported by the MSM dittofied talking heads. Why shouldn’t they be? It’s their stock in trade. True, they go after her, even for perceived dishonesty. But it’s all BS things like Whitewater and Benghazi and email servers, which a fair observer will conclude rightly are idiotic. This helps create a “crying wolf” response among enough of the public that they will ignore other legitimate criticism. She is then able to holler about how the MSM doesn’t treat her fairly. It’s, again, the same game the Rs have going.

    I don’t want to be in the bubble. Frankly, it’s the Rs home turf and they will crush us there. Also, it risks losing the support of even more voters ready to give up on the whole thing. Hillary could damage the Democratic party as badly as Bush should have the Republicans.

    I still plan on voting for her in the GE and will highlight her positives in conversations with people outside of lefty blog land. ETA: For all her faults, the Rs are worse on every individual point. /ETA But I’m not terrible far on this side of the fence as far as whether the risk of losing this election outweighs the risk of losing for a decade.

  139. 139
    Omnes Omnibus says:

    @cthulhu: Wisconsin has had the opposite example. Voters have noticed. Polls in WI have had Feingold consistently ahead of Johnson.

  140. 140
    Technocrat says:

    @Steve in the ATL:

    What does that word salad even mean? Damn, I’m way in the bag for Clinton, and even I think “rainbow shitting unicorn” is just edginess for it’s own sake.

  141. 141
    Omnes Omnibus says:

    @Kay: None of them have a sense of humor. Directly mocking him is the way to go, IMO.

  142. 142
    Steve in the ATL says:

    @Technocrat: Bernie bros are condemning Hillary for not being a pure and perfect progressive. Others contend that no such thing exists, and not even Bernie is one, and that Hillary as president would further the goals of the Bernie bros far more than any Republican as president so it’s foolish to accuse her of being a right wing monster and refusing to vote for her in the general election if she is the Democratic nominee.

  143. 143
    Technocrat says:

    @Steve in the ATL:

    Yeah, BUT…no, I pretty much agree with all that.

  144. 144
    Kropadope says:

    @Kropadope: Persistence would have been a better term than frequency in my post here.

  145. 145
    Aqualad08 says:

    “Impressively dumb,” says the guy who’s party is about to be taken over a WWE Hall of Fame inductee….

  146. 146
    mclaren says:

    Yeah, this one is pretty stupid — but it’s Cooke who’s stupid.
    Incidentally, don’t mistake Clarles Cooke of the National Review for the Charlie Cook of the Cook political report.
    Charlie Cook is one of those Nate Silver guys who looks at polls and analyzes trends. He’s apolitical.
    Charles Cooke is the worst kind of hack.

  147. 147
    mclaren says:

    @Steve in the ATL:

    Bernie bros are condemning Hillary for not being a pure and perfect progressive.

    Actually, Bernie supporters are condemning Hillary for being a Republican Lite whose foreign policy is indistinguishable from George W. Bush/Henry Kissinger’s.

    But by all means, keep pushing your bullshit meme.

  148. 148
    mclaren says:

    @Steve in the ATL:

    For all her flaws, Hillary has a huge, huge, HUUUUUUGE advantage over Obama: she’s not black. The last eight years have proven just how racist this country still is.

    Spoken like a white privileged male.

    Any woman can tell you that being female in America makes you about as much of a second-class citizen unperson as being black.

  149. 149
    Omnes Omnibus says:

    @mclaren: People read your first take on this. If you are going to completely rework your comment to say something completely different, have the honesty to admit that you confused two people and are correcting yourself.

  150. 150
    BillinGlendaleCA says:

    @mclaren: Charlie Cook and Charles Cooke are different people.

  151. 151
    cthulhu says:

    @Omnes Omnibus:

    Wisconsin has had the opposite example. Voters have noticed. Polls in WI have had Feingold consistently ahead of Johnson.

    Agreed. WI doesn’t flip in 2016. Perhaps if there’s a major national security event, Bernie looks weaker against Trump but Hillary doesn’t. And yet in WI, I don’t see Trump outdoing either.

    It’s a very lame thing to focus on the non-college educated white vote (or any subset for that matter) based on national polling because they can be somewhat different state to state in voting patterns very much depending on local economic and other conditions. In fact, to quote from the 538 tools footnotes: “For simplicity’s sake, our interactive allows users to adjust turnout and vote share settings on a national basis, assuming a uniform swing across all states. Such swings are never truly uniform from state to state and from one election to the next.”

  152. 152
    Omnes Omnibus says:

    @cthulhu: Exactly.

  153. 153
    The Fat Kate Middleton says:

    @John Cole: Yessss.

  154. 154
    Kropadope says:

    @Technocrat: So, which was the time it became law? The fourth?

  155. 155
    1weirdTrick says:

    it’s your party and you cry if you want to

    That was so beautiful, Cole. National Review columnist tears are sweet.

  156. 156
    Omnes Omnibus says:

    @Kropadope: Have you considered google?

  157. 157
    AnotherBruce says:

    I notice that in the Gitmo photo, they crop the heads of the military escort and their prisoner. It’s much easier if you don’t have to look at the face of the person you would kill. Fucking cowards.

  158. 158
    Scott Alloway says:

    Charles Cooke: You are a disgrace to anyone who writes for a living. You are too kind to the right wing.

  159. 159
    Kropadope says:

    @Omnes Omnibus: I don’t like to see someone start a story and not see it through to the end.

  160. 160
    Omnes Omnibus says:

    @Kropadope: Dude, go read Technocrat’s comment above.

  161. 161
    Kropadope says:

    @Omnes Omnibus: I did, man. That’s why I knew he didn’t discuss the bill’s actual passage in 2005. Did you read it?

    I was trying to get Technocrat to discuss this without calling him/her on not mentioning the fact that the bill was ultimately passed, since I didn’t know the motives behind it. The thinking could have been “Duh, anyone reading should know that.” But I already knew it passed and reading the comment made me had to double check. The other possible reasons for not mentioning was to not raise the fact that would indicate that Hillary, in fact, voted for the bill a second time which kinda spoils the killing it twice part and might leave some people thinking it never ever passed and I’m talking out of my ass.

    I didn’t want to discuss those less charitable interpretations without cause. I was trying not to be a dick, but you had to go and be a dick and ruin that for me, thanks.

    Oh, and why is it that in other contexts, what Hillary did as first lady doesn’t count? Either it does or it doesn’t, not per what looks good on her.

  162. 162
    RandomMonster says:

    I just want to say how much I appreciate John’s recent rants. Things of beauty, approaching a rant art form. Don’t stop, JC, you’ve been hitting your stride!

  163. 163
    Daulnay says:

    Here’s why Trump has a chance: Hard-Pressed Skeptics

    He’s got strong appeal for the ‘Hard-Pressed Skeptic” group of the electorate, which gave Obama the edge in the past two elections. For example, this:

    Trump speaks for

    We can only hope he drives some of other traditionally Republican voters to Hil or Bernie or to staying home.

  164. 164
    NR says:

    @Daulnay: Trump may very well alienate some traditional Republican constituencies. But he might be able to make it up with votes from disaffected Midwestern working-class whites and wannabe stormtroopers.

    One thing is certain–he’s definitely driving higher Republican turnout. And that should be a big warning sign for Dems. Even if Hispanic turnout increases proportionally in opposition to him, the Hispanic vote is mostly concentrated in non-competitive states, while the working-class white vote most definitely is not.

  165. 165
    AxelFoley says:

    @NR:

    @C.V. Danes: Trump can definitely beat Hillary, and anyone who thinks he can’t is far too naive for their own good.

    You’re just to fucking stupid to think that.

  166. 166
    NR says:

    @AxelFoley: Wow. Great argument.

  167. 167

    […] He was the bomb that dropped, but Charles Cooke at the National Review says it’s time the real Republicans and real conservatives built their own atomic bomb – It’s Time for an Anti-Trump Manhattan Project – whatever that means. Nevada does make one think of atomic bombs, but John Cole at Balloon Juice says these real Republicans and real conservatives have only themselves to blame: […]

  168. 168
    scarshapedstar says:

    Post for the ages, Cole.

  169. 169
    Elizabelle says:

    A Manhattan Project, suggests young Charles C.W.** Cooke?

    You mean, like something important that GOVERNMENT supported and built, and that worked? Nah ….

    **C.W. means — check all that apply:

    ____ Conservative Wanker

    ____ Conventional Wisdom

    ____ Confirmed Whine-ass

    ____ Cruz Whisperer

    ____ Conveniently Witless

    ____ Conspiracy Whelper

    What do you think?

  170. 170
    NobodySpecial says:

    @NR: As compelling as the original. After all, he’s not the one insisting that a Great White Wave is going to destroy Hillary Clinton with a circus clown in the vanguard when they couldn’t manage to do it twice running against a black Kenyan socialist in more favorable conditions. But then again, the last time I heard that argument made, it was made by Starburst Lowry and Wrong-Way Kristol.

  171. 171
    AxelFoley says:

    @liberal:

    Thanks, Obama! (And Hillary!)

    Hi, Berniebro. Mad that your boy is getting his ass kicked? Saturday and Tuesday will put the nail in the coffin for his campaign.

  172. 172
    C.V. Danes says:

    @NR: @Cpl. Cam: Trump is only going to win if a lot a Democrats either stay home or cross over. We will just need yo make sure that neither happens.

  173. 173

    […] Balloon Juice’s John Cole offers a detailed (but not family-friendly) reply: […]

  174. 174
    Paul in KY says:

    @jl: He’s sorta like a Batman villain. Would call him ‘Deathhair’ or something like that.

  175. 175
    Paul in KY says:

    @NR: He’s dangerous, because he brings in new voters.

  176. 176
    Sherparick says:

    @Princess: Yes,Cooke’s come back to John Cole was very lame and snappish.

  177. 177
    Paul in KY says:

    @Cpl. Cam: If you had told me in early 1999 that Al Gore was going to be beat by fuckin Dubya, I would not have believed you.

  178. 178

    I’ve said this before, but I’ll say it again. The most maddening thing about Republicans pissing and moaning about how this awful, awful Trump person is fouling their nice little party is that they can’t or won’t own up to the truth that they did this themselves. No, it’s always somebody else’s fault. Always. Always.

    It’s President Obama’s fault. If he hadn’t been so divisive and uncompromising, then these Republican voters wouldn’t be flocking to Trump. It’s the Democrats’ fault. If only they weren’t so intensely partisan, the Republicans wouldn’t be voting for Trump. It’s Trump’s fault for somehow conning these people into voting for him. It’s the voters’ fault for letting themselves get suckered by this huckster. It’s Mexico’s fault. It’s China’s fault. It’s the Pope’s fault. It’s Iran’s fault. It’s liberals’ fault. It’s the Tooth Fairy’s fault. It’s Michael Moore’s fault. Santa Claus did it. Paul Krugman did it. Somebody else did it, anybody else, I swear it, I don’t know who and I don’t care who, but it’s somebody else’s fault, please let it be somebody else’s fault, it can’t be our fault, it can’t be, we didn’t do this, please, believe us, we’re just helpless bystanders here, somebody come and save us, what the fuck are we going to do, God, Almighty, what are we going to do?

    I don’t know why it’s so deeply important for them to blame somebody else. Everybody already knows this. I don’t know. maybe they just need to buy into this lie so they can keep living with themselves. Maybe utter ruin is somehow a little easier to deal with if you didn’t bring it on yourself. Or maybe they’re just so constitutionally incapable of taking any responsibility for anything they do that it’s somehow psychologically beyond them to own up to what they’ve done.

    Why they can’t, at this point, I don’t even really care. I just wish they’d grow up, own up to this, and then do something to fix it. Or else disband and go live in caves somewhere.

  179. 179
    ellie says:

    Wait, he actually tweeted back “Impressively dumb?” Was he talking about himself?

  180. 180
    Technocrat says:

    @Kropadope:

    Sorry man, I went to bed before I could respond. Hillary was absent for the 2005 vote. I agree I should have mentioned it, but since she was absent I didn’t really consider her “involved”.

    It was a fair question, and I appreciate you not jumping to conclusions about my motives.

  181. 181
    JimL says:

    John, haven’t you learned by now the useless nature of yelling at the smugly ignorant.

  182. 182
    MBunge says:

    @Kay: Is Clinton really going to see a huge drop off in white voters when Obama didn’t?

    It’s not just about race.

    In 2012, people who made under $50,000 were 41% of the electorate. Obama won them 60-38.

    High school graduates made up 21% and Obama won them 51-48. People with some college education were 29% of voters and Obama won them 49-48.

    People 18-29 were 19% of voters and Obama won them 60-37.

    African-Americans were also 13% of voters in 2012 and Obama won them 93-6.

    Those are five significant voting groups where it’s not that hard to see Trump either doing better than Romney or turnout being lower than it was for Obama.

    I continue to be amazed at how the accomplishments of Barack Obama are taken for granted, including being able to win the Presidency while losing the white vote by 20 points.

    Mike

  183. 183
    Halffasthero says:

    John, I have followed your website for years (and years) but rarely ever post anymore. That being said, no one rants as beautifully as you do. This last one is a masterpiece of anger and accuracy. Sorry I did not see it until today but felt compelled to tip my hat nonetheless.

  184. 184
    Kropadope says:

    @Technocrat: Yeah, sorry, I didn’t mean to spell it all out like that, but Omnes had me on the defensive.

  185. 185

    […] in a more demotic, and vindictive, key – for that matter an oddly familiar key – you can try John Cole at Balloon Juice, as per recommendation of OT commenter Chip […]

  186. 186
    Kenneth Fair says:

    Another dumb thing they believe that you left out, John: Women coming to the U.S. to have “anchor babies.”

  187. 187
    Andy says:

    @Paul in KY: I said this the other night, “Jesse Ventura, and “4 the LULZ”.
    I was called an asshole because I said Trump wins 2016.

    “The 1998 Minnesota gubernatorial election took place on November 3, 1998. Reform Party candidate Jesse Ventura defeated Republican Party challenger Norm Coleman and Minnesota Democratic–Farmer–Labor Party challenger Hubert H. “Skip” Humphrey III. Ventura governed with a DFL-controlled state Senate and a Republican-controlled state House.
    Ventura’s victory as a third party candidate was considered a historic major upset. He ran on the Reform Party ticket, a party which was founded by two-time presidential candidate Ross Perot who had received 23% of the vote in Minnesota in the 1992 presidential election and 12% in the 1996 election.”
    And then:
    “I Did it for the Lulz (also known as 4 the lulz) is a popular catchphrase used to express that one carried out a specific action for the sake of personal comic enjoyment.”
    It could happen, real easy.
    I think the commentariat here went off on some tangent about 4chan, blah, blah, blah.
    Goons. Don’t get it.

  188. 188
    Barry says:

    @Cpl. Cam: @C.V. Danes: After eight years of peace and prosperity under Clinton I thought Gore stomping the shit out of W. was a no-brainer. Now I put nothing past the American public. Nothing.”

    After watching Jeb! piss $150 million away for four delegates, it’s clear that that W won because the ‘liberal’ media was in the tank for him 100%.

  189. 189
    JohnM says:

    OK, is Cooke calling himself or your post “impressively dumb”? It’s not like he gives or links to any info/evidence/ridiculous theories to back up his tweet.

  190. 190

    […] should not be surprising. ((If you prefer your left-liberal lullaby in a more demotic key, you can try John Cole at Balloon Juice, as per recommendation of OT commenter Chip Daniels.)) If you, dear user, have not been saying […]

Trackbacks & Pingbacks

  1. […] should not be surprising. ((If you prefer your left-liberal lullaby in a more demotic key, you can try John Cole at Balloon Juice, as per recommendation of OT commenter Chip Daniels.)) If you, dear user, have not been saying […]

  2. […] in a more demotic, and vindictive, key – for that matter an oddly familiar key – you can try John Cole at Balloon Juice, as per recommendation of OT commenter Chip […]

  3. […] Balloon Juice’s John Cole offers a detailed (but not family-friendly) reply: […]

  4. […] He was the bomb that dropped, but Charles Cooke at the National Review says it’s time the real Republicans and real conservatives built their own atomic bomb – It’s Time for an Anti-Trump Manhattan Project – whatever that means. Nevada does make one think of atomic bombs, but John Cole at Balloon Juice says these real Republicans and real conservatives have only themselves to blame: […]

Comments are closed.