We are developing the social individualist meta-context for the future. From the very serious to the extremely frivolous... lets see what is on the mind of the Samizdata people.

Samizdata, derived from Samizdat /n. - a system of clandestine publication of banned literature in the USSR [Russ.,= self-publishing house]

Samizdata quote of the day

For America, and indeed the rest of the world, Clinton versus Trump will be like being on a bus being driven at high speed towards a cliff by a psychopath, where there’s a chance that a chimpanzee might grab control of the steering wheel. It’s not a question of whether this will make things better or worse, it’s more that the whole idea of “better” may be gradually ceasing to exist.

Frankie Boyle. The rest of the article is flatulent Guardianista stream-of-consciousness gibberish but that bit made me laugh. I read this shit so you don’t have to.

And I do agree with this:

“It’s not a question of whether this will make things better or worse, it’s more that the whole idea of “better” may be gradually ceasing to exist”

… it is highly unlikely Frankie Boyle and I have the same notions in mind about what “better” looks like (indeed his “better” is almost certainly my very much “worse”), but that phrase does a good job of describing my view on the folly of decade after decade of voting for whoever is ever so slightly less evil. Things never get better unless you support, well, better, rather than “less worse”. Unless you are willing to punish “your side” by not pulling that lever, eventually it stops being your side because you will vote for it anyway. And in evidence of that, I present the G.O.P.

Tweet about this on TwitterShare on FacebookShare on TumblrShare on RedditShare on Google+Share on VKEmail this to someone

66 comments to Samizdata quote of the day

  • Laird

    That certainly worked out well in 2012, when conservatives stayed home rather than voting for Mitt Romney, didn’t it?

  • The whole reason you got Mitt RomneyCare on the ticket in the first place was voting for an endless procession of Big State Republicans. If you expect conservatives to vote, try running a conservative candidate for once.

  • Cristina

    “If you expect conservatives to vote, try running a conservative candidate for once.”

    And if you expect fairies to vote, try running Snow White as a candidate for once.

  • Runcie Balspune

    Yeah, but you don’t want the wrong lizard to get in, do you?

  • Ken Mitchell

    Cthulhu for President!

    Why Vote for the LESSER Evil?

  • D. Neilson

    In the contest between the psycho and the chimp. I choose the chimp. Now remind me which is the chimp here?

  • llamas

    There is always a ‘better’ and a ‘worse’.

    Right now, if the contest is Trump vs Clinton, then Clinton is the better outcome for the nation.

    Doesn’t mean I will vote for her – that would still be very hard for me to do – but I’ll let it happen. I absolutely will not, under any circumstance, vote for Trump if that is the choice.

    llater,

    llamas

  • Paul Marks

    The United States (and the rest of the Western world) is already facing crises – both fiscal (the entitlement programs – the unfunded liabilities), military (newsflash to Rothbardians – the American military is in terrible DECLINE, for example the United States Navy and Air Force have been cut in half since the end of the 1980s and are a shadow of what they were 50 years ago, and the CULTURE of the military is under full scale attack from the P.C. regime), monetary (the financial system is a vast Credit Bubble), and CULTURAL.

    Yes the American “Great Society” Welfare State (and all the rest of it) have produced a CULTURAL (not just an economic) crises – much of the population is utterly ignorant and just wants their desires met and met NOW – “I want”, “I want”, “I want” is all they know – they are babies, but in adult bodies.

    Hence Trump – and Clinton. For they both pander to these scum (the word “scum” is correct).

    Problems? Difficulties?

    “The rich” and “big business” are to blame for them all – after all the school teachers (and the Hollywood movies and television shows) say so – so it must be true. And many highly educated and well off people believe this – it is not just some of the poor (not all -there is a cultural divide among the poor).

    Even Donald Trump (the man of vast inherited wealth – which has boosted by the Property Bubble created by the Federal Reserve) plays this game – it is the “other” rich people who are to blame for all problems.

    Massive reform is needed – or the United States (and the rest of the West) will fall.

    And both Mr Trump and Mrs Clinton are not the source of such reform.

    Indeed they will hasten the process of destruction.

    As for those who say “what of it – we can survive without the United States”.

    I hope you never have to put that hope to the test.

  • Paul Marks

    And the “intellectuals”?

    Their thoughts are plain enough…….

    “The age of the men of the West is passing – gone will be the moral chains of “right” and “wrong”, “good” and “evil”.

    A new age is beginning. An age of unlimited cruelty and savagery – an age we must rule….”.

    So they believe – these clever fools.

    They do not understand that, soon enough, the savage mobs they have worked so hard to create (all round the world) will turn-on-them.

    The witchdoctors will end up burned (or eaten) by very creatures they think they control.
    .

  • Ken Mitchell

    llamas @ April 5, 2016 at 6:54 pm said: “There is always a ‘better’ and a ‘worse’.
    Right now, if the contest is Trump vs Clinton, then Clinton is the better outcome for the nation”

    Trump may be an incompetent idiot, but Hillary is ultimately corrupt and has only her own interests at heart. We don’t need a North American Evita. America can survive incompetence; it won’t survive another 4 years of corruption.

  • Regional

    The last five Primaries Bernie Sanders out polled Hillary Clinton 80/20 in minor states.

  • Laird

    I’m with Ken Mitchell on this, llamas. Trump may be a buffoon, but he will be largely harmless (or at least, we can easily survive whatever harm he manages to accomplish). In fact, I would say the same about Sanders. Not so with Clinton. Anyone would be preferable to her. She frightened me far more than her husband back when he was in office, and still does.

  • Ellen

    When it comes to Clinton and Sanders, I would vote for anything else — even the horse Caligula appointed to the Senate. The horse, after all, had government experience, and no desire for foreign adventures, money, or all kinds of things. Better King Log than King Stork.

    But I’d only vote for Cthulhu if he picked Basement Cat as his running mate.

  • Since most of us are in non-competitive states, we can vote our conscience. I’m voting for Gary Johnson if he gets the LP nomination.

  • llamas

    @ Ken Mitchell & Laird – if Trump were merely an incompetent buffoon, I might be inclined to agree with you. But ‘incompetent’ and ‘buffoon’ barely begin to describe the depths of his unfitness for this office.

    He is incapable of articulating a consistent policy position – about anything. In many cases, he cannot articulate a comprehensible position at all. Since I cannot believe that he is incapable of simple math, many of his budgetary pronouncements bespeak a stunning ignorance of the most basic parts of the US system. Presently, his penchant for off-the-cuff pronouncements of jaw-dropping stupidity merely harm himself. I cannot begin to imagine the damage he could do, both domestically and internationally, when his chronic inability to think before speaking becomes the official representations of the United States.

    The breadth and depth of his ignorance of all of the things that a US President should know something about, or know who to ask, simply boggles the mind. Couple that with the way in which he actually revels in his ignorance, and exhorts his supporters to believe that all the world’s problems are simple to understand and easy to solve, and you have a recipe for untold disasters. Just today, we learn that he believes that he can learn all he needs to know about nuclear missile treaties in 90 minutes. His arrogance and overweening belief in his own, entirely-untested abilities, borders on megalomania.

    He cannot possibly achieve any of the goals he so confidently sets forth, for reasons either political or economic. Yet he continues to promise them to his supporters. Either he knows he’s telling them lies, which is bad enough, or he actually believes what he tells them – which is worse. At least Hillary merely deludes the voters – I suspect that Trump actually deludes himself. He actually believes his own publicity.

    When faced with a character like him, at once completely-inexperienced and yet 100% convinced of his ability to completely master the task he seeks, and couple that with the peculiar streak of personal malice and childish petulance which has now become his trademark, and I say – better the devil we know. There’s just no telling what damage this dangerous clown could cause.

    Someone mentioned Hillary as a US version of Evita Peron, but I think it’s the other way about – it’s Trump who is the Evita figure – a cult of personality around a dramatic figurehead, making bold promises and feeding romantic dreams which have no basis in reality.

    llater,

    llamas

  • stef

    Trump has at least not pissed all over national security and things he was sworn to uphold.

    Aside from this, Trump has three things going for him over Clinton:

    1. he will shit right back on the media
    2. he will be actively opposed by the entire left
    3. he will be actively opposed by a huge proportion of the middlish and right

  • llamas

    Stef – Trump has never been sworn to uphold anything, and he has never had any control over any aspect of national security. He simply has zero knowledge or experience of either thing. Saying that he hasn’t mishandled these matters simply observes that he hasn’t yet had the chance to do so.

    llater,

    llamas

  • Fraser Orr

    Let’s just state the problem as it is. The problem is not the chimp. It is not the psycho. Every society has chimps and psychos. The problem is the people that vote them in.

    And let’s be absolutely clear, there were MUCH better candidates in this election. Rand Paul for example, who though not perfect would make a positive difference.

    However, he didn’t stand a chance because the American people don’t want that type of society. They want the type of society Trump or Clinton would delivery (though they’d naively prefer it without the corruption.)

    Look, Hillary Clinton is demonstrable a serious felon and her crimes undoubtedly include the use of her public office to enrich herself. The fact we have to ask if there is a chance she will get indicted tells you most of what you need to know. The fact that she would still get 40 million votes and have a chance of winning in the electoral college even if she was wearing an orange jumpsuit this November tells you the rest you need to know.

    The problem is not the politicians, it is the people. They want all this shite. They might argue over the boundaries and degrees of measure. But nobody is talking about privatizing the public school system, or deregulating the medical industry or eliminating public welfare so that private charity can provide. These things aren’t even up for debate.

    The people want all this bollocks big state stuff, and Hillary, Bernie, Donald and Ted are more than happy to give it to them, good and hard. Please, let’s not shoot the messenger.

  • JohnK

    Llamas:

    Obama does not even bother to attend the daily national security briefing, and Hillary kept top secret emails on an illegal server. And you think Trump’s bad?

  • JohnK

    The last five Primaries Bernie Sanders out polled Hillary Clinton 80/20 in minor states.

    Regional:

    I think you mean white states. The extent to which Sanders wins white states and Hillary wins states with large black populations is really stark.

  • Nicholas (Excentrality!) Gray

    JohnK, how do the states divide up in America? Will Sanders win the Demo vote from now on?

  • JohnK

    As I understand it, Hillary has sewn up the “super delegates”, so it is virtually impossible for Sanders to win. However it has been really noticeable that in the northern, majority white states, Sanders tends to win, but Hillary always wins the states where there is a large black vote.

  • Regional

    JohnK,
    Fair enough you’re a Seppo and much more familiar with Seppo politics than me. Would it be true the big Democrat blocks of New York and California is where Sanders needs to win?
    WTF is a ‘super delegate’, are they like voting machines in Illinois where no one votes Republican?

  • Regional

    Fraser Orr,
    Boom Boom, the sheeple are stupid, they think elections are like Pavlov’s dog, ring the bell and vote Democrat to pick toppings for your pavlova?

  • Eric

    Trump has at least not pissed all over national security and things he was sworn to uphold.

    That’s because he doesn’t even know the words. He was dumbstruck when someone asked him what the nuclear triad was. How could a guy Trump’s age, a guy who went to military school FFS, not know what the nuclear triad is?

  • Nicholas (Excentrality!) Gray

    You mean the Triads have nuclear weapons?! How come no-one told me this! Where do they stash them?

  • Resident Alien

    The fact that State governments run party leadership elections (aka primaries) on behalf of the two big parties and give the elected candidates a fast track to nomination for the actual presidential race, is outrageous.

  • Ken Mitchell

    Regional @ April 6, 2016 at 1:12 am: “Would it be true the big Democrat blocks of New York and California is where Sanders needs to win? WTF is a ‘super delegate’, are they like voting machines in Illinois where no one votes Republican?”

    “Super-delegates” are elected Democrats such as Senators and Representatives and other Democrat party officials; they are automatically delegates to the convention, and uncommitted to anybody. Since they ARE “democrat party officials”, the majority of them currently favor Hillary, BUT they can switch at any time. If there’s a preference cascade in Sanders’ favor, or when Hillary is indicted on espionage and corruption charges, the the super-delegates are free to change their minds at any time. Some, of course, are personally committed to the Clinton Crime Family Foundation and have been living off that gravy train for two decades, so THOSE are unlikely to defect.

    Even though I live here in California, I don’t have any sense of which way the state will go. A lot of Californians routinely lie to pollsters, so even the exit polling on election day may be compromised and inaccurate.

  • Ken Mitchell

    Eric @ April 6, 2016 at 1:22 am: “That’s because he doesn’t even know the words. He was dumbstruck when someone asked him what the nuclear triad was. How could a guy Trump’s age, a guy who went to military school FFS, not know what the nuclear triad is?”

    The details of the “nuclear triad” (manned bombers, ICBMs, and submarine-launched missiles) is the sort of factual background that his military advisers can teach him, except that you can’t have advisers during “GOTCHA!!!” interview questions. The difference is that even if he’s an ignorant blowhard, I do believe that Trump loves America. I don’t believe Hillary loves anything other than herself.

    Trump would be a gamble, while Hillary is a known quantity; a corrupt and self-seeking traitor.

    I’m a Cruz supporter, but I’m going to paste in this tweet every chance I get:
    Jeff @EmpireOfJeff tweets:
    “You “conservative” “pundits” still don’t get it: Trump isn’t our candidate. He’s our murder weapon. And the GOP is our victim. We good, now?
    12:25 PM – 14 Aug 2015 “

  • Regional

    Ken Mitchell,
    Do you have representations o flowers pasted over your Kombi van and do you a herb garden in your back yard?

  • Ken Mitchell

    Regional @ April 6, 2016 at 2:45 am: “Ken Mitchell, Do you have representations o flowers pasted over your Kombi van and do you a herb garden in your back yard?”

    I had to google the phrase “Kombi van”, so the answer would be a solid “NO!” I don’t even like Volkswagens. I’m not much for “representations”; I prefer the real thing. For flowers, I have 65 rose bushes in the yard. They had a tough time during the last couple of years of California drought, but most have survived and are doing quite well in this El Nino spring. For vegetables, I grow tomatoes; it’s really the only vegetable worth the effort of growing your own, because store-bought tomatoes are generally flavorless. There’s really nothing to compare to the taste of a BLT when the tomato is so fresh that it was picked AFTER the bacon was already cooked…

  • Regional

    Ken Mitchell,
    Fresh Grosse Lisse tomatoes I hope.

  • JohnK

    Regional:

    As Ken said, super delegates are a way for the Democrat party machine to make sure that the pesky voters don’t get in the way of the preferred candidate, which this year is Hillary. The Republicans don’t have them, and no doubt the Republican National Committee, the brain of the stupid party, wishes they did.

    I agree that California and New York are the big two. Whether they have enough white voters to swing it for the communist over the traitor will be quite the question.

  • David Moore

    Trump will be less harmful than Clinton, simply on the basis that if elected I don’t believe Trump will actually attempt to do very much at all. Clinton will be very active indeed, and most of it won’t be visable, nor with good intent.

  • Mr Black

    Trump is the superior option between the 3 simply because he does love America and the American way. It is enough that his heart is in the right place, even if his policy will be created at a later date. We know for sure that the communist and the corrupt traitor are evil and self-interested to their core. They may have command of more policy facts and figures, but their policies are evil and destructive, they get no points for that.

  • The problem is not the politicians, it is the people. They want all this shite. They might argue over the boundaries and degrees of measure. But nobody is talking about privatizing the public school system, or deregulating the medical industry or eliminating public welfare so that private charity can provide. These things aren’t even up for debate.

    The people want all this bollocks big state stuff, and Hillary, Bernie, Donald and Ted are more than happy to give it to them, good and hard. Please, let’s not shoot the messenger.

    This.

  • Yes unfortunately I agree Tim, Fraser Orr has it right. Once it became clear the deeply flawed but somewhat useful Cruz never had a chance, I realised that there has never been a US election that I really give less fucks about. In a way maybe it would be better if the process accelerated, Sanders wins and gives the voters exactly what they voted for: Obama on steroids, much as Obama was in many ways Bush on steroids. Yet in truth too ghastly to contemplate. A bit like Corbyn winning here.

  • llamas

    Mr Black wrote:

    ‘Trump is the superior option between the 3 simply because he does love America and the American way. It is enough that his heart is in the right place, even if his policy will be created at a later date.’

    On this basis, we should elect Chance, the Gardener.

    Forgive me, but I don’t think either our patent enemies or our soi-disant ‘friends’ are going to take a few months off while our new President figures out how to do his job and what his policies are. I’d like a President who knows what he’s doing, when he starts doing it. OJT is fine for the White House tour guides, not for the President.

    And – forgive me again – if his policies will be created ‘at a later date’, then how do we know what we are voting for – today?

    Furthermore, none of what I have seen of Trump leads me to believe that he loves ‘the American Way.’ On the contrary, he doesn’t seem to understand it at all. From advocating the killing of non-combatants, to taking people’s property by force to build parking lots, to talk about ‘passing laws’ which self-evidently breach the Constitution, his whole ideology (so far as a reasonable person can decipher his often-incoherent babbling) seems to be based on the concept of ‘using force to achieve whatever Donald thinks is a good thing – today.’

    llater,

    llamas

  • llamas

    Oh, and +1 Fraser Orr. He has the exact right way of it. In this election, we truly see the truth of the old dictum that we get the politicians we deserve.

    Messrs Stanshall and Innes told us, 40 years ago, and it’s just as true today:

    Bonzo Dog Doo Dah Band

    Preside!…..Order!…..Order!

    Noises on the radio, megaphones on cars
    Sermons from the street of shame, know-it-alls in bars
    Posters in suburbia, experts on TV
    Don’t let them disturb-i-ya
    They’re just the powers that be
    Don’t worry! Nobody can win!
    No matter who you vote for, the government always gets in

    Oh great, great slumbering nation
    Awake! Set yourself free
    Oh! Smell the comforting bacon, taste the bromide tea
    And give a little chirrup as I ladle on the syrup
    Promises are cheap
    Let me bear your crosses, make me boss of bosses
    Then you go back to sleep

    Don’t worry! Pop your cross in the bin
    No matter who you vote for, the government always gets in

    Memories of a finer place in comfortable Shangri-La
    Then they too have their Shangri-Las
    See them in the public eye, oozing oily charm
    Hear them all personify, down on Animal Farm
    Dog eat dog, but cock and bull isms are the game
    Ism this and ism that
    Isn’t it a shame!

    Don’t worry! Nobody can win!
    No matter who you vote for, the government always gets in.
    Don’t worry! Pop your cross in the bin
    No matter who you vote for, the government always gets in.
    Don’t worry! You know you can’t win!
    No matter who you vote for, the government always gets in
    No matter who you vote for…………..

    llater,

    llamas

  • Mr Ed

    ‘using force to achieve whatever Donald thinks is a good thing – today.’

    Yes, but you have that approach already, why not have a quick Constitutional Amendment and extend the Presidential term limit to 3 terms?

    BTW we will know when we are making progress when a serious Presidential candidate is asked about abortion and says something like ‘Altering Roe v Wade is properly a matter of making a Constitutional Amendment, and that is a process which has nothing to do with the President.‘.

  • john

    I’m sorry to say it, but:

    the concept of ‘using force to achieve whatever… [he] thinks is a good thing – today.’

    is pretty much the sum of political thinking by nearly everyone, voters, candidates, and dinner table pundits, from town council elections to the presidency in every jurisdiction with which I’m familiar. I’d guess that for 90% of people the principal is not only unquestioned but unquestionable.

  • Laird

    Llamas objects to Mr. Black’s comment “Trump is the superior option between the 3 simply because he does love America and the American way. It is enough that his heart is in the right place, even if his policy will be created at a later date,” not only for the sentiment expressed but also because he questions whether Trump really does believe in “the American way”. Setting aside that latter point for the moment, I would posit that what is in a man’s heart should be the primary basis for choosing a president. We can never know what events will confront the next president, but the whole point of representative government is that we choose people who will react appropriately (as each of us defines that term) at the time. We’re taking a calculated gamble on any president, so the best any of us can do is try to get one who reflects our personal beliefs. Sneering that we should “elect Chance the Gardener” is an inappropriate response to a legitimate point.

    As to OJT, every president necessarily learns on the job. There is no training for the position (the closest which comes is serving as Vice President, but we don’t have one of those on offer this time). No one goes into that job knowing how to do it, and everyone, no matter how well prepared, has gaps in his knowledge base (which is why they have advisors, who are specialists). Management experience is useful, which is why former governors generally make better presidents than former senators, but managing a large business enterprise is also a useful background. Barack Obama was as completely unprepared for the job as it is possible to be, yet even he learned and we have survived his 8 years. (And all the bad and stupid things he has done were because his “heart” was wrong; see above.) Frankly, I think it’s far more important to know who a candidate’s advisors would be than whether he knows technical details such as the “nuclear triad”.

    Does Trump love “the American way”? Hard to say, in part because there’s no precise definition of the term; it means whatever each of us thinks it means. But if we can agree that it embodies the concepts of reward for hard work, the virtue of thrift, and minimizing the burden of government, I think that in general he does. Certainly he has taken personal advantage of such policies as eminent domain, and I would argue that is merely playing within the system except for the fact that he apparently still believes that it’s a good policy. So he’s flawed. I can deal with that, because I don’t think he’s corrupt in the sense that Hillary Clinton is (or stupid to the core, as Sanders is).

    I am not arguing that Trump would be a good president (let alone a great one). I very much doubt that he would be. But I don’t think he would be a disaster, either (as Obama has proven to be, and as Clinton surely would be as well). For all his flaws he does seem to be the best option remaining, the “lesser evil” as Perry would say. You have to play the cards you’re dealt, and if we have a bad hand we still can play it to the best advantage. Or we can fold and throw it in, but that’s a guaranteed losing strategy. I prefer to go down trying.

  • llamas

    That reminds me – Trump is an advocate for returning the US to the gold standard. Between that and his support for corn-based ethanol, I know all I need to know about him – he’s a scientific AND an economic ignoramus.

    As to Trump’s love of the American way, using Laird’s definitions:

    “. . . reward for hard work . . . ”

    Unless your reward for hard work is something he wants to park limousines on, in which case, he thinks it’s fine for the state to take it from you, by force. Or maybe it’s money you paid taxes on, and want to send to your family far away, but he decides he wants to confiscate it from you for some pet project of his own. Are those the kinds of ‘rewards for hard work’ that you claim Trump loves? in which case, I guess you are right in one sense at least – he loves to find ways to take them from you.

    ” . . . the virtue of thrift . . .”

    As epitomized by the countless millions he has made by exploiting people’s attractions to thriftless activities such as casino gambling, ‘get-rich-quick’ real-estate programs, wildly-overpriced steaks and liquor, and a thousand other similar schemes.

    ‘ . . . and minimizing the burden of government . . . ”

    Really? Give examples. Every coherent policy position he has taken to date (that has not been walked back within hours) has tended to either fix or expand the powers of government over the people. Building walls, imposing tariffs, confiscating remittances, punishing women and/or doctors for performing abortions, there’s no power of government that Donald has seen that he does not want to either use as-is or expand even further.

    As to suggesting that it’s OK that Trump is incompetent and unfit for the office he seeks, because President Obama was likewise incompetent – Wow. Just wow. Could you set the bar any lower? Is this now the new standard to fitness for office – he’s no worse than Obama was? Really?

    Sorry. Better the devil we know than this incompetent, ignorant, incontinent clown.

    llater,

    llamas

  • Shlomo Maistre

    “If you expect conservatives to vote, try running a conservative candidate for once.”

    And if you expect fairies to vote, try running Snow White as a candidate for once.

    Cristina is on fire! Again, the prosecution rests.

  • Laird

    Incontinent“? Where did that come from? Or were you just testing me? 🙂

    But I’ll give you the others. Still, my preference is to take a chance on someone who at least has the possibility (however remote) of being better, than to go with a guaranteed corrupt traitor. Apparently your mileage varies. So be it.

    I didn’t set the bar that low; the American people did. I’m just playing the cards I’ve been dealt.

  • Shlomo Maistre

    Obama has been a bad President and Clinton will be about as bad but the truth is that the American people deserve much worse than either of them. And I predict the American people will get the government they deserve in due time.

  • Alisa

    Am I the only one here who thinks that voting is not a civic duty – or even a wise action – under any and all circumstances?

  • Shlomo Maistre

    Am I the only one here who thinks that voting is not a civic duty – or even a wise action – under any and all circumstances?

    I agree!

  • Eric

    The details of the “nuclear triad” (manned bombers, ICBMs, and submarine-launched missiles) is the sort of factual background that his military advisers can teach him…

    Well, sure. For that matter we could elect a two-year-old and appoint a council of regents.

    There are certain things I expect a normal man to konw by the time he reaches a certain age: Don’t fry bacon in the nude, don’t date hookers or strippers, and the meaning of “nuclear triad”. I can forgive the millennials, because they’ve been at the same time horribly undereducated and over-schooled, and anyway for them the cold war may as well be the siege of Troy. But there’s no excuse for a man Trump’s age. It makes me wonder what else normal people know that Trump doesn’t know.

  • Brad

    We’re fucked in the US.

    The saddest part is, if this were 20-25 years ago, one might feel they could just keep their head low and ride it out. But, now, the government has grown so large, the Apparatus so deep into daily lives, with full tracking switched on, there’s no way to stay out of the vortex.

    What is the consensus opinion on New Zealand?

  • Cristina is on fire! Again, the prosecution rests.

    You keep resting after making points I find incomprehensible. I suggested when someone pointed out the consequence of conservatives not voting for Romney was Obama, that conservatives did not vote for Romney because Romney was not a conservative. To which Cristina suggested to get Fairies to vote Snow White should be run. Well yeah, ok. Perhaps there is some nuance to that I missed.

  • It makes me wonder what else normal people know that Trump doesn’t know.

    Quite so Eric. But maybe Trump would just get rid of the triad and play Texas Hold ’em with Putin, the winner gets to keep Crimea (or maybe the loser, not sure).

  • Nicholas (Excentrality!) Gray

    New Zealand is a beautiful country, speaking a variety of English which most people can understand. they’ll talk a lot about being Middle-Earth (Lord of the Rings), but we Australians soon put them in their place, by reminding them that the literal land of the Gods was to the west, just as Australia is to NZ. However it does have earthquakes now and then (not enough virgins to sacrifice).

  • Fraser Orr

    @Eric, I don’t get it. I am a pretty well educated chap and I had never hear that “nuclear triad” terminology either. Do you doubt that Trump was aware of these three types of nuclear weapon platforms? It reminds me of the brouhaha over over whether it is Second Corinthians or Two Corinthians. I mean terminology is rather overplayed.

    Not that that means I think he isn’t a narcissistic blowhard. There are plenty of substantive reasons to hate him. But unfortunately in American elections you don’t vote against someone, you have to vote for someone. I am really rather at a loss as to whom I should vote for: the narcissistic blowhard, the corrupt, treasonous felon, the soft headed socialist, the crazy preacher man?

    Hmmh, let me think, which lever should I pull?

  • Nicholas (Excentrality!) Gray

    Trump was trumped in Wisconsin, as was Clinton. Maybe he won’t win, but he’ll then become an Independent, and split the right-wing vote, and the Demos could win easily.
    If Britain does exit Eurotopia, it might be worth emigrating to! Because of climate change, the weather won’t now deter people, and it has its’ own currency.

  • Cristina

    “Am I the only one here who thinks that voting is not a civic duty – or even a wise action – under any and all circumstances?”
    No, Alisa. Actually Shlomo Maistre and I have sustained similar point of view here before, to the dismay of Paul Mark and several others enthusiast of democracy.

  • Cristina

    Perry, I’m sorry the comment resulted nebulous to you. The idea was: there isn’t a conservative candidate because there isn’t a conservative electorate. If you have the latter, then you could have the former, maybe. I personally don’t believe that possible, but I know most do.
    Not for nothing Shlomo Maistre and I are kindred spirits 🙂

  • Shlomo Maistre

    Indeed.

  • Julie near Chicago

    If you fail to vote, meaningfully, against the worser of two evils, then if the worser of the two is elected, a drop or two of the resulting blood will be on your hands.

    If the chances are 99.99999999999…..% that X will muck it up royally, but only 80% that Y will be equally bad, it’s common sense to decide to vote for Y and against X.

    A person’s estimate of which evil is the worser and of which probable mucker-upper is X and which Y is, of course, his own to make and to use as his guide in choosing who gets his vote.

  • Julie near Chicago

    Above is, of course, my opinion. Not intended as a Proclamation.

  • Shlomo Maistre

    If you fail to vote, meaningfully, against the worser of two evils, then if the worser of the two is elected, a drop or two of the resulting blood will be on your hands.

    Oh no! Gosh – am I guilty even if the winner of the election won by, say, more than a single vote?

    In any case, the vast, vast majority of people are stupid and having them try to figure out who is the lesser of two evils is going to be a disaster. Oh, whoops, it already is.

  • Alisa

    the crazy preacher man

    Huh?

    Paul Mark and several others enthusiast of democracy

    Sorry to repeat myself, but huh?

    Julie, the point is that by voting for the lesser evil, one is still voting for evil.

  • Julie near Chicago

    I understand, Alisa. But my point is, that by failing to vote against the worse* candidate, you do your bit to help elect him.

    Not only do you deny him your vote, but you also allow one of his to remain a force, however minute, pushing the final result in his favor.

    *(Worse in your, the voter’s, judgment, that is.)

  • Alisa

    Can you elaborate on that? Not sure I will have a reply, but I will read and consider.