October 8, 2016

Moralizing decorum fetishists: Democrats pursue descent into irrelevancy

Admittedly the inversion of which party belongs to the holier-than-thou elites has come abruptly, but you'd think that with the billions of dollars that the Clinton campaign is spending on expert analysis, they'd be better at reading the direction of the country. Then again, maybe it's their sclerotic bureaucracy that keeps them from adapting in real time.

Whatever the reason, they have convinced themselves that "going nuclear" means bringing up past instances of Trump engaging in guy talk about women. And not in a neutral tone of "the evidence speaks for itself," but the most fiery finger-wagging moralizing that we've seen this side of "Parental Advisory: Explicit Lyrics".

So Trump issues a brief video apologizing for guy talk, then pivoting to attacking Bill's record of sexual assaults and Hillary's intimidation of the victims afterward, to keep them from ruining their ambitions. BFD.

Hillary surely remembers sitting on the couch with Bill for an hour-long interview about his 12 year-long affair with Gennifer Flowers. That was 60 Minutes, right after the Super Bowl. Far more flagrant of an offense, far more groveling of an apology, and far more intense of a spotlight on them before the entire nation.

And yet Bill went on to win the nomination and then the election. In the voting booth, nobody cared about his problematic past with women -- and they didn't even know about his many sexual assaults either.

Beyond not caring, a large share of voters had become downright disgusted by the hypocritical grandstanding about family values from the Religious Right, after so many televangelist scandals (affairs, prostitutes, etc.).

Now the shoe is on the other foot. Everyone except for Millennials knows about Bill's womanizing past, and Hillary's role in at least enabling him. Soon they will learn about his assaults and her intimidation of the victims. Even without knowing about the really gruesome stuff, though, middle America instinctively distrusts the grandstanding about the proper treatment of women, when it's coming from the Clintons.

Can you imagine if in 1992, the lead prosecutor of Bill's character flaws had been Jimmy "I have sinned" Swaggart? Talk about tone-deaf and clueless.

And they're sick of being lectured about women's issues and family values, when the economy continues to provide lower-paying jobs with less security, and when we're wide open to all sorts of foreign threats that the elites tell us not to worry our little heads about.

A generation later, it's still the economy, stupid. It's not that voters liked Slick Willy for having had affairs -- they were rejecting the incumbent party that had degraded into an out-of-touch elitist group that was more worried over decorum than the American people's fundamental well-being. And it's not that most voters like Teflon Don for having joked around about skirt-chasing. They're sick of the incumbent party being more concerned with how we act in our private lives than with protecting us and providing for us.

The difference this time is that the President-to-be is not a phony politician just trying to get elected in order to enrich themselves, while doing nothing to help the voters who got him there. Trump is rich enough already, not a career politician, and has been sticking his neck out for the major causes like being against NAFTA for decades. Real change is coming this time, and people know it -- making them even less likely to give a shit about what he said about chasing tail in the past.

If the Clinton campaign has proven to be this clueless and hell-bent on driving over the cliff, what does that portend about the future of the party? The Bernie fans are planning on an immediate overhauling in their direction, and away from the colossal failure of the Clintons. But I wouldn't bet on that.

Look at how long it took the Republican party to re-orient after becoming less and less electable from 1992 onward. The re-alignment process seems to be subject to hysteresis.

What we're looking at is a near-term rise of the Republicans in their Progressive Era re-incarnation, replacing the corrupt urban immigrant party that the Democrats were around that time (Tammany Hall). After the Democrats carry out their own purge toward populism over the upcoming decades, it will be their day in the sun, a la the New Deal that followed after the Progressive Era.

21 comments:

  1. My takeaways from this incident:

    - The media knows the Friday leaks (Podesta e-mails, Goldman Sachs speech excerpts) are potentially devastating for Hillary so they were desperate for something, anything to cover them up with
    - They have nothing stronger than "Trump said something vulgar about a woman 10+ years ago", even though they've been playing that card in various forms for over a year and it hasn't scratched the surface
    - The massive majority of the public that distrusts the media is going to roll their eyes at this hysterical language policing. As you say, this election especially is not about who has the nicest table manners, plus Trump still remains more personally likable than Hillary in any case
    - This incident will serve as a nice reminder to Trump that he can't count on the cucks whatsoever. Ryan and McConnell leapt on the bandwagon to wag fingers at him. They've gotta go back first chance we get (I'd honestly support a Dem to run to unseat either of them at this point).

    ReplyDelete
  2. This post brought a smile to my face, thanks, Ag!

    These scandals all show the same dynamic: Populist Right all alone, everyone else on the other side. Most of all, the TrueCon seeing their chance to climb back to power. Talk about a people who don't know when they've been beaten. But they stay in their little bubble... It's kind of scary how isolated and insulated they are because they do have real power to persuade for their disastrous ends: demoralize Trump and his supporters.

    But, I'm not worried. Just annoyed. If they think they will have the good will of Trump supporters should he lose... oh, as if they've wondered. They just assume it's theirs. Ugh.

    My guess is that a lot of people on the populist left (and maybe even others) don't like that Trump is being vilified over this, and I'm talking men, of course.

    ReplyDelete
  3. This blog keeps me sane

    ReplyDelete
  4. The cuckservatives will hold onto their neo-con neo-liberal white-night mangina ways for longer than you imagine.

    ReplyDelete
  5. It's telling which group of Republicans is whining about what Trump said, trying to replace him -- not the evangelicals or family values leaders, but the non-religious globalist elitists.

    It shows that the GOP outrage has nothing to do with teaching the wrong message to children, but with the anti-elite manners that Trump has. That lowers the value of the GOP brand among elite or aspiring elite voters, while boosting it with blue-collar voters. We know which group Paul Ryan et al want to appeal to.

    On policy, he's taking a sledgehammer to Wall Street, the Chamber of Commerce, etc. -- not evangelical churches, who he's promised to liberate from the Johnson Amendment that doesn't allow churches to advocate politically. Not to mention appointing conservative Supreme Court Justices.

    ReplyDelete
  6. The pushback from non-elite women has been funny -- "Yeah, so what? Like women don't talk about the size of men's packages when we're by ourselves? Or how easy it is to get men to do what you want, if you wear the right pair of shorts to the club?"

    The country clubbers in the GOP are getting the vapors at the thought of sharing a big tent with men and women who are culturally prole (regardless of how much money they make).

    For them, it was bad enough having to share the big tent with prole church-goers -- now they're also standing uncomfortably close to chicks with tattoos and guys who joke about chasing tail.

    You're not in Kansas anymore, faggots!

    ReplyDelete
  7. Tying this into the polls, we see how they appear to change for the worst after an apparently bad event, even though there's no real change. It's just a change in who feels like responding to the pollster.

    Look at who is the most willing to share their feeling pro or con about Trump, among those who have said they're supporting him -- it's the weak ones who are shouting about how they're suddenly uncertain or going to vote for someone else.

    The solid supporters are just trying to ride out the latest meaningless brou-ha-ha, and are more inclined to not get into this lame debate.

    Those different inclinations will change the composition of the sample when pollsters call, and make it look like Trump's support has fallen even though it's stayed roughly the same.

    Maybe a few cucks abandon ship for good, and maybe a few blue-collars take their place, since they want to be with the prole-friendly party rather than the brie-and-chablis pearl-clutching party.

    ReplyDelete
  8. It's telling which group of Republicans is whining about what Trump said, trying to replace him -- not the evangelicals or family values leaders, but the non-religious globalist elitists.

    I had a long conversation with several people on this exact issue last night, and we were all marveling at the fact that it's amazing the Evangelicals are standing strong, but the 'cucks' are the ones wilting (of course, as noted, they aren't really wilting, just playing for advantage).

    ReplyDelete
  9. On Facebook my Bernie bro / Johnson supporter brother put up a bland post about how Trump isn't the only one who uses foul language, quote with curse words from Hillary.

    Several airhead suburbanite "women" jump on saying "Are you fucking serious?" etc.

    I say that Bill Clinton has sexually abused many women, Hillary intimidated afterwards, to keep them from ruining the Clintons' ambitions. Name names of the victims.

    That was last night -- and absolutely no more from any of them. It was a debate-ender, when they were hoping to pile on Trump and his supporters for the whole weekend over this problematic gaffe about women.

    That's what you use to shut these people up.

    ReplyDelete
  10. Many people are saying that this smells more like a hitjob by the GOP Establishment and the Bushes in particular, rather than the Clinton campaign.

    I agree that the Republican elite were in on it, but look at how much the liberal media, liberal voters, and liberal politicians all ran with it.

    Just because the source may have been the GOPe, doesn't disprove the point about the Democrats having now become the party of elitist decorum fetishists.

    ReplyDelete
  11. Everyone who said "Don't be so paranoid about the VP having to replace Trump" when we were arguing over Sessions vs. anyone else -- do you really think the GOPe and their Wall Street / Chamber of Commerce cronies are above trying to assassinate Trump if he became President?

    Here they are, a month out from the election, trying to sink him and replace him with Pence.

    Remember what happened to Reagan with Bush as VP. Not saying Pence would lead the attempt himself, like the sociopathic globalist Bush did on Reagan. But you guys really think they're above attempting something like that over 4 to 8 years?

    If they even try it, a lot of pissed off hillbillies with guns are going to come out of the woodwork and start clearing out the traitorous elites the hard way, if they won't go the easy way.

    ReplyDelete
  12. Random Dude on the Internet10/8/16, 9:12 PM

    Anecdotally speaking, most of the women Trump voters I know either haven't bothered to comment or said "I'm still voting for him anyway." It doesn't seem to have an appreciable impact.

    Some of the virtue signalling I'm seeing from some of the guys is hilarious. I played high school football with many of these guys and the raunch we discussed before and after practice, in the gym, on bus rides to and from games, at parties, or just in general made what Trump said child's play. Now of course we were teenagers and not running for high political office but some of the "I AM SHOCKED AND OFFENDED" rings hollow from these guys. Hard not to roll your eyes at this type of stuff. Oh well, 99% of these guys will still vote for Trump and the remaining 1% weren't going to vote for him anyway.

    ReplyDelete
  13. I believe this leak was a GOP operation. The Clintons would have had the good sense to wait until a week before the election before trotting it out and hoping that the resulting scandal cascade (from old pageant contestants and jilted conquests coming out of the woodwork offering testimony for a payday/some attention,)would finish Trump off. Releasing it now only causes the seals to be broken on the Pandora's Box that is Bill Clinton's Rape-a-Palooza and Hillary's Mafia style coverup of it all, which is something the Clintons were desperate to avoid.

    No one can live around video cameras as much as Trump has and not have said something racist, sexist, or problematic at some point in their lives. I predict there are a lot of Pill Cosby-type "gotchas" waiting out there in the wings, but if Trump dismisses them all, forges ahead, and doesn't drop out, he has a chance.

    ReplyDelete
  14. If Trump wins, hopefully he has the good sense to repay the social conservatives and in particular mormons and Texans for their treatment of him during the primary and GE.

    ReplyDelete
  15. The social conservatives are treating him well -- they gave him the Deep South during the primaries, which ended the race. Texans have come around to him in the meantime.

    Mormons are worse, but they don't need to be punished -- just ignored when they clamor for open borders, sanctuary cities, etc. If they eventually leave the GOP coalition for a third party or even join the Democrats, we can make up for their loss with a gain elsewhere in the country, like the Rust Belt.

    ReplyDelete
  16. The group he truly has to destroy is the Republican leadership, who had a hand in this hitjob and tried to pounce on him right away. They have been two-faced traitors the whole time.

    We voters need to do our part, too, and vote them out -- "even if" it means voting for their Democrat opponent. I put that in quotes because they're really no different on the major issues, and at least they won't be entrenched incumbents who have a built-up network, wealth, and inertia keeping them in a position to derail Trump.

    This should be a real no-brainer if the Democrat is better than the Republican on a major issue -- like Ted Strickland being more protectionist on trade than Rob Portman, in the Senate race in Ohio.

    The most important thing now is to purge the old traitors. If we get impotent freshman Democrats for a few years, BFD. We can work on building better Republicans to replace them in the meantime.

    Unless I find solid evidence that the down-ballot Republicans are in the mold of Trump, Sessions, etc., I will be voting Democrat all the way down except for Trump at the top. They all gotta go back.

    ReplyDelete
  17. Speaking of the women coming out for Trump, of course a lot of this is political posturing, but I swear it points to sterility, really, sterility. Our birthrates are blah, and the coveted dream of low teen birthrates has been achieved at what seems to be a terrible cost.
    I am more and more convinced that a lot of our weirdness, low libido, is connected to widespread use of birth control which is related to.... status climbing.
    Not to reveal TMI, but I feel so different from so many women who are up to 20 years younger with their slovenly looks and "Don't tell me to smile" attitude. My youngest is now two, approaching three and whenever my babies reach this age... well, these women are just totally different.

    Back on topic. I don't watch t.v. and have taken to heart the advice about tuning out the demoralizers, but before I did, I got the sense that the only people upset about the video were the globalist neocons and Never Trump looking for the flimsiest of pretexts.

    Someone said maybe a hit by the RNC or whatever. This is the umpteenth time, but by far the largest attempt at a coup by these folks. They're just getting more shrill and desperate, grabbing at any tool, whether from Hillary or whatever, and now shedding the pretense.

    ReplyDelete
  18. The election can't happen fast enough. The whole she-bang is geared against Trump right now. One "gotcha" after another. But hey, the polls have barely changed. And none of the "scandals" involve illegal behavior (though the media is tiptoeing around libel issues via innuendo, like when the NY Times said that Trump "could've" done something illegal or unethical with his taxes).

    Notable is that the only women to come forward and make an accusation is Machado, an utterly worthless slut who was discredited so fast that the media dropped the issue abruptly and moved on to the tax "gotcha". I feel that the masters of the universe are so clueless that they thought just one of these things would send Trump's numbers plummeting, clear out his rallies etc. But as each fails to stick they desperately throw out the next "scandal".

    They know which polls are the most reliable (some of which they do themselves). The big headlines, the faux-alarm and shock of the reporters and smarmy elites, the parading of attention whore would-be leaders of various victim groups, and so on are not having the intended effect. For so long they knew that they set the tone, the rules, the parameters of acceptable discourse and goals. It's not working anymore; they've been dethroned and they still don't get it.

    I do think that they honestly are surprised that Trump is still standing. They aren't shocked by Trump per se as much as they are by the fact that they can't effectively marginalize him. Hello, Clinton is not just the worst candidate but also the worst person to ever run for Pres. To cast out Trump would be to side with Hillary. Don't they get that?

    Also, I'm starting to think that the elites of both parties let Trump basically sail through the nomination and most of the campaign because they didn't trust either Cruz or Trump. The preferred GOPers abysmally bombed and Sanders was taken out by both the elites and uppity blacks, leaving the establishment with no choice but to wait for October in which they would began firing on full auto at Trump in order to save Hillary.

    Without Trump (perhaps Cruz would've been willing to scrap too), we would have yet another Republican who refuses to effectively play either offense or defense, which is exactly what the most nihilistic elites want since the GOP remains the white party and as such is more likely to produce candidates and supporters who take issue with the darkening of the West. A fair amount of Hispanics are going to pull the lever for Trump too, since Hispanics are less entitled and aren't anywhere near as psychotically hateful towards whites as blacks are. The more people wake up to how toxic blacks are, the more that the Dems can be hammered as the black party. A big reason Republicans did so well in the late 60's-80's is because the majority of white Americans didn't want anything to do with black people while Dems sided with blacks. Great idea. Who want's Amber or Heather to be raped by Tyrone?

    When cocooning and striving are reduced, black criminals will do even more damage as PC wanes. Thereby activating racial consciousness in more whites and making cultural conservatism more appealing. It's no coincidence that the 90's were THE black decade. That's when cocooning appeared again and decadence really intensified. Remember People Under the Stairs from '91? Yeah, the main problem with shitty black ghettos is that perverted white people are exploiting everyone. Sure.

    ReplyDelete
  19. Agnostic,

    Great work. I love the blog!

    You wrote:

    "We voters need to do our part, too, and vote them out -- "even if" it means voting for their Democrat opponent. I put that in quotes because they're really no different on the major issues, and at least they won't be entrenched incumbents who have a built-up network, wealth, and inertia keeping them in a position to derail Trump.

    This should be a real no-brainer if the Democrat is better than the Republican on a major issue -- like Ted Strickland being more protectionist on trade than Rob Portman, in the Senate race in Ohio.

    The most important thing now is to purge the old traitors. If we get impotent freshman Democrats for a few years, BFD. We can work on building better Republicans to replace them in the meantime.

    Unless I find solid evidence that the down-ballot Republicans are in the mold of Trump, Sessions, etc., I will be voting Democrat all the way down except for Trump at the top. They all gotta go back."

    I get the sentiment, but I'm not convinced this is tactically wise. Help me rationalize this. We're in NH; my wife is furious at Kraven Kelly Ayotte, who turned turned tail on Trump this weekend. ("Because motherhood.") I'm willing to "hold my nose" and vote 'R' down the ballot, though. I'd like to punish all the Cucks, but what if my vote gives Democrats the Senate?

    Help me decide if you can!

    ReplyDelete
  20. The only value of having Republican majorities per se, regardless of where they stood on any issue, is if it would guarantee kneejerk partisan support for a Republican president.

    What we have seen for over a year is exactly the opposite -- it was the GOPe that ambushed Trump in the first debate, on Fox News rather than CNN or MSNBC, the GOPe who set up their NeverTrump plan at Sea Island Georgia, and the GOPe that just tried to sink Trump's candidacy at the last minute.

    Not only will they not reflexively circle the wagons around Trump, they will be the first to turn on him, using shameful rhetoric about "the greater good of the party and of the republic" bla bla bla.

    Reagan was nearly assassinated by a member of a family that was close to the Bushes, not the Kennedys.

    Also, the GOPe Congressmen have been incumbent for so long that they have a powerful force multiplier behind their sabotage, compared to some freshman Democrat who would have none of the built-up wealth, influence, and network within the Establishment.

    And as we've seen, the Congress doesn't really control that much anyway -- otherwise we'd have something to show for Republican majorities in both houses.

    So unless they're one of the few who have been good to Trump, they have no business staying in office.

    We can work on getting better Republicans for the next primaries, or again picking the Democrat if they're better. It's insane to keep voting Republican if they're terrible on the issues. Strickland, for example, is simply better on the issues and Trump voters should choose him no matter what -- getting rid of an incumbent GOPe traitor who wouldn't even show up to the national Convention being held in his home state, is just icing on the cake.

    ReplyDelete
  21. Thanks so much for the reply. I appreciate it.

    Excellent points. Makes sense to us: Irrespective of the madman's electoral fate, only way to break up the uniparty is to oust cucks, especially influential ones and in an environment where Congress doesn't do shit and rinos are worse than Dems. Go Trump!

    Keep up the great work. You write well and have great insights!

    ReplyDelete

You MUST enter a nickname with the "Name/URL" option if you're not signed in. We can't follow who is saying what if everyone is "Anonymous."