Lion of the Blogosphere

Kushner in Forbes

Pretty good article about Jared Kushner in Forbes (but marred by a few hostile anti-Trump sentences). Kushner definitely seems like the brains behind the Trump campaign.

Written by Lion of the Blogosphere

November 22, 2016 at 9:49 am

Posted in Politics

36 Responses

Subscribe to comments with RSS.

  1. Lion of the Turambar wept


    November 22, 2016 at 10:12 am

    • Uh why is that?

      First off I dont believe 80% of what is in the article (although the Filet o’ Fish is a funny poke at the Vox set). If HRC had eeked out some more votes this article would never have been written and would that have made Kushner’s moves dumber? We would have an article about what a brilliant strategist someone in Hillary’s Brooklyn headquarters is, but effectively they wouldnt have done anything better or worse either.

      The best thing that happened to Trump was the FBI letter (out of their control) and Trump staying off Twitter and on message (in their control).

      Beyond that the article is a bit superficial. There was a Bloomberg piece on Cambridge Analytica (Cruz’s big data outfit) which had more insight. They were specifically trying to deincent Hillary demographics by targeting ads to their media. The problem Hillary always had is that no one liked her very much, so she had very broad but not deep support. The Forbes story focuses on the typical story line of targeting your groups. Frankly I dont think they did such a great job as I am in a target demographic in a swing state and I never got a contact. Other candidates figured out my email without me ever interacting with them, but Trump’s campaign didnt. And their youtube ad targeting seemed a bit spotty to me too.

      The fact that they got quotes from Eric Schmidt for this article is interesting. If Trump isnt sabre rattling at Alphabet he ought to be. There are lots of regulations, or even monopoly investigations that could be launch and I am sure Schmidt would fall in line to prevent that from happening.

      Lion of the Turambar

      November 22, 2016 at 2:03 pm

      • LOTT is right. You need to keep in mind that he barely won with hugely delegitimizing loss of the popular vote. If they had the kind of fine tuned control over the outcome that the article implies they did it would have been insane of them not to spend the money to give him a lead in the popular vote.


        November 22, 2016 at 2:32 pm

      • Not only was Trump fighting against Hillary, he was fighting against the MSM. pretty much every corporate interest, most superpacs and billionaire donors including those from the GOP. He was even being undermined by 1/3 of the GOP politicians, two former GOP presidents and the last GOP nominee. He had to build his ground game from scratch since the GOP macine had blackballed him. And he won. This was the most mismatched political contest in modern history. He wasn’t even a seasoned politician and he STILL won. And he did it with less money than Jeb spent in the primary. Now you want to come back and say “popular vote herp derp”. Yeah, well, the popular vote isn’t what gets your ass elected. Don’t minimize the accomplishment, cuck.


        November 22, 2016 at 4:17 pm

      • I’m not minimizing his victory. If anything I’m doing the opposite. The article is essentially saying they coasted to victory because Kushner is such a genius. I said that idea is ridiculous because if they were so smart and had so much control they would have gotten a more resounding victory. You’re saying the article is ridiculous because Trump had the odds so stacked against him that any kind of easy victory was impossible.


        November 22, 2016 at 6:46 pm

      • Every “expert” said it was impossible for Trump to win. Yet Trump won.

        Lion of the Blogosphere

        November 22, 2016 at 6:52 pm

      • Also literally the only part of conservatism I like the non cuck parts. All the people here who adhere to right wing economic theory may be opposed to cucking themselves in favor of minorities but have no problem letting plutocrats cuck them by messing up their lives and taking away their reproductive opportunities.

        How does it not make you a cuck to bankrupt yourself from medical expenses and still support a system that enriches a minority at the expense of more rational system that maximizes societal benefits and would make them better off?

        This is not necessarily directed at you destructure,.


        November 22, 2016 at 6:52 pm

      • “Every “expert” said it was impossible for Trump to win. Yet Trump won.”

        Well the margin was clearly the reopening of the FBI investigation into her email. That plus the Podesta wikileaks were three uninterrupted weeks of bad coverage for her. And the salacious Weiner angle made it noteworthy. That was the deux ex machina. Isis kinda blew it.

        As Bernie the Red noted- “People as sick of hearing about your damn emails”. But the reality of electing a Clinton is hearings years more of their scandals and I think a lot of people came to that awful realization in the closing month. Her weaker supporters melted away. In California with its supporting echo chamber she actually got more votes that Obama had. But in Ohio she lost 500K votes while Trump only gained 110K over Romney. A lot of people didnt come out for her.

        Lion of the Turambar

        November 23, 2016 at 12:02 pm

  2. I have Hillary’s final margin in the popular vote being 1.9%. I do not believe voter fraud made up more than 1/10th of a point of this margin.

    I estimate Trump lost 2.3 points of Romney voters to Johnson/McMuffin and that Hillary lost 0.7 points to a combination of Stein and Johnson. If we add the lost votes to each side we will get a Hillary margin of victory of 0.3%.

    It is unclear how much Hillary’s not being black cost her in the popular vote, but her being black absolutely would have been enough for her to flip the electoral college. I believe that a black candidate could have gotten an additional ~2.2 net points from the black vote alone. That takes what I will call the Democrats “natural margin” from 0.3% to 2.5%.

    Also worth examining is how many Romney voters did not vote for Johnson or McMuffin but actually went as far as to vote for Hillary. I don’t believe it was a huge number and there really isn’t much data to go on, but I think we can say it accounted for at least 0.2 points of the margin. Now we are back to the Democrats having a natural margin of 2.3%

    In 2020, we can expect the Democratic natural margin to expand by another 1.5 points up to 3.8 simply as a result of the electorate getting younger and less white.

    On the surface, these numbers look terrible, but they really aren’t. In 2020, Trump still has a great deal of room to grow amongst whites who voted for Hillary this time. Were Trump to flip 3 points of Hillary’s white votes, easily doable with the advantage of incumbency and a united party behind him, the popular vote margin would be Trump winning by 0.3%.

    We are in good shape for 2020, just need to build the wall, pass the infrastructure bill and destroy the immigrant community and we will put the Dems in the position of having to run on tearing down the wall, raising taxes and bringing back in the immigrants we will have annihilated.

    The coming recession and stock market crash will hurt us, but we’ll be okay as long as we do what the public elected us to do.

    Otis the Sweaty

    November 22, 2016 at 10:38 am

    • Otis, I am with you. I think 2020 is TRUMP’s to lose. If he does a good enough job, he will prevail over whatever liberal hack the Dems put up against him. However, the media will be a difficult headwind for him to overcome. And all that said, I am afraid the idea that TRUMP will enact some kind of policy to radically change the demographic trends in the country is a pipe dream. The Democrats are not stupid. They will take away from their disastrous defeat what they need to, and realize the key is to run NAM candidates from now on. I am afraid that next time we may not be as lucky as we have been in 2016.

      Two in the Bush

      November 22, 2016 at 11:17 am

    • I like Otis’s optimism. Let’s also not underestimate the power of incumbency. People hate unknowns and uncertainty (at least normies do). Many people were afraid of Trump this time around that weren’t screeching liberals. Next time they won’t be since we will have had four years of not having world war 3 with Russia and actually had de-escalated tensions. Plus more leftist chimpouts should hopefully throw more people to our side..

      Defunding sanctuary cities (the three Mecca’s of liberalism New York, San Francisco, and Los Angeles) should break the spine of liberalism. Trump loves his home city of New York and wishes to see it great again (i.e. Multicultural and cosmopolitan, but less depraved than its current Babylonian self).

      Removing federal funds from this cities will hopefully decrease their natural blue voter base like shining light on roaches. Some will be deported others (white hipsters) will be scattered to the winds (back to their home towns due to lack of funding for their precious NGO’s). This will also make people more rooted and turn some shitlibs red. At the very least it will have a reverse jerrymandering effect on places like California, ensuring an even likelier electoral college victory.


      November 22, 2016 at 11:52 am

    • We are in good shape for 2020, just need to build the wall, pass the infrastructure bill and destroy the immigrant community and we will put the Dems in the position of having to run on tearing down the wall, raising taxes and bringing back in the immigrants we will have annihilated.

      The Democratic Party is going to have a “white” problem of its own, with very contentious arguments over who they nominate for high office. Blacks are going to demand minority candidates, and that ugly process will be off-putting to some in their party.


      November 22, 2016 at 12:00 pm

      • Yeah its worth noting as Repubs become more white, naturally the Dems become more NAM.

        As you are all aware, anything become NAM is a recipe for dysfunction. Appealing to NAMs in this day and age will turn off many blue collar whites sick of ads promoting black men and the negrification of NFL, music and culture more generally.

        The Democrat is one small step from becoming….the minority party. And minority’s rarely win in democracy.

        Also note, that Repubs control all other organs of government, including most states and the Supreme Court will likely have an anti-immigration judge appointed.

        The Philosopher

        November 22, 2016 at 1:34 pm

    • My post was in no way meant to be optimistic. I actually believe it to be rather conservative about Trump’s 2020 chances.

      I’m not worried about the non white vote because history shows that the the higher percentage of white votes you win, the higher percentage of non-black non-white votes you win with it. Imagine if in 2020 Trump is able to hold his margins with black voters and do 10 points better with Hispanics/Asians/Other non whites. That alone would make take Trump’s projected popular vote victory from 0.3% to 1%.

      My scenario also assumes that the Democrats nominate Cory Booker. I think it is beyond question that the Democrats will never nominate a non black again but it has to be the right non black. Kamala Harris would be poison to suburban whites but I don’t know if the Democratic establishment is strong or cohesive enough to push Booker through the primaries. For the sake of my projection I am assuming that the Democrats will be able to get it together and go with Booker, but I really don’t expect them to in actuality.

      If Harris is indeed the Democratic nominee, that is another 2.8 point swing for Trump, so his margin rises from 1% to 3.8%.

      But like I said, we got to stay focused. Got to build that wall, pass the infrastructure bill, pass the tax relief, destroy BLM and destroy the immigrant community. Make politically popular changes that the Democratic base hates to force the Dems to explicitly run on raising taxes, letting blacks run rampant, and importing 10s of millions of immigrants.

      I hope Trump doesn’t abandon the wall. It goes to his credibility and it will drive the Left insane to the point where they will run on the politically unpopular promise to tear it down.

      Otis the Sweaty

      November 22, 2016 at 1:24 pm

      • it will drive the Left insane to the point where they will run on the politically unpopular promise to tear it down.

        Good point. We can bet that the discoveries of endangered spotted toads, sacred Indian burial grounds, critical underground aquifers, secretly buried radioactive waste, etc etc will reach a fever pitch on the southern border. Will be tons of pressure (even from the alt-right) to use lazy/embezzling union labor, too.*

        *I’m not as anti-union as most Republicans, but the wall is too important to entrust to them.


        November 22, 2016 at 2:00 pm

  3. It’s possible that Kushner’s importance is being exaggerated so as to ease peoples’ fear of anti-Semitism in the Trump administration.


    November 22, 2016 at 12:17 pm

    • Why would the mainstream media want to do that?

      Lion of the Blogosphere

      November 22, 2016 at 1:00 pm

      • The just world fallacy. Trump won so he can’t be that bad and because of political correctness his jewish son in law must be even better.

        Also the media is a business and they realize that everyone hating and mistrusting them isn’t good for their bottom line.


        November 22, 2016 at 1:32 pm

      • The cucks want to convince the neocons and Wall Street who backed Hilary that Trump is not ‘off the reservation’.

        Trump has never said anything anti-semitic so it was mostly projection anyway.

        The Philosopher

        November 22, 2016 at 1:35 pm

      • Not the MSM; the Trump people and Republicans. Forbes is a centrist to center-right outlet (which makes it extreme right by media standards).

        IMO, Occam’s Razor says Kushner has a lot of influence, but that it’s also sometimes exaggerated, because Kushner is a self-promoter (and because he and Ivanka are pretty much the only young, attractive-looking people in Trump’s inner circle).


        November 22, 2016 at 1:50 pm

      • “Why would the mainstream media want to do that?”

        I was thinking more that Trump’s own camp would exaggerate Kushner’s importance. Although if that was their game, they would have done it a few months ago.


        November 22, 2016 at 2:06 pm

  4. Kushner’s grandparents were Bieleski partisans in WWII.

    Otis the Sweaty

    November 22, 2016 at 12:26 pm

  5. The Spencer speech and hitler cartoon props are getting a lot of attention. Either Spencer is off his rocker or the audience were plants.

    Bienhart is arguing the electors in the college should rig it against Trump.

    If they did that, Bienhart would be swinging from a lampost.

    The Philosopher

    November 22, 2016 at 3:45 pm

    • Spencer wants attention. And he is at least pretending to hate jews and wants to build a political movement around that hatred.


      November 22, 2016 at 6:39 pm

  6. Day 2: The golden glow intensifies further (a little bit).

    DJIA 19024 (+0.35%)
    WIRUS 240.4 (+0.20%)

    “Dow set for all time high as Trump honeymoon continues”


    November 22, 2016 at 4:21 pm

    • The Fed will tamp down the “irrational exuberance” when they raise rates next month. smiling about who is really in control of the economy.


      November 22, 2016 at 5:22 pm

    • I love how now that Trump got elected all the conservatives are touting the unemployment and stock market figures that they all ignored prior to november 7th.


      November 23, 2016 at 9:39 pm

  7. And yet antisemitic white nationalists continue to support Trump passionately, while left-wing SJW Jews are panicking that he’s going to throw Jews into gas chambers. Our whole society has gone insane.


    November 22, 2016 at 7:32 pm

  8. The stereotype that Jews are puppet masters is strong in this one.

    One thing that I’ve never understood about Mr. Kushner: He tells the world he’s a Orthodox Jew, yet he never wears a kippa in public, at least this what we see in the media.


    November 22, 2016 at 8:06 pm

    • Kushner is too well groomed to be an Orthodox Jew.


      November 22, 2016 at 8:07 pm

    • He’s a branch of “modern Orthodox” who believes it’s OK to wear normal American clothing.

      The Yarmulke is not actually a “law,” it’s just a custom.

      Lion of the Blogosphere

      November 22, 2016 at 8:07 pm

      • I’ve never heard of this branch. He’s no different from Reform Jews.


        November 22, 2016 at 8:08 pm

      • No, he’s not the same as Reform Jews. He keeps Kosher and presumably he keeps the Sabbath. You don’t have to wear a Yarmulke to be Orthodox.

        Lion of the Blogosphere

        November 22, 2016 at 8:10 pm

      • Yes, Modern Orthodox wear normal American clothing, but they are also suppose to don a kippa.


        November 22, 2016 at 8:12 pm

      • Reform Jews could keep Kosher and observe the Sabbath if they want. Judaism, other than the Hasidim is quite flexible. But wearing a kippa in public is usually required of the Orthodox. Many Modern Orthos would wear a hat/cap over their kippa.


        November 22, 2016 at 8:15 pm

  9. FWIW there’s a couple of these types where I work. They use the special kosher fridge in the break room which was installed for the one Hasidic guy we have and leave early on Fridays just like he does. They’ll put on a yarmulke for saying their prayers but not the rest of the time.

    So on the Jewish spectrum they are definitely nearer to Orthodox than Reform.

    Lionel of the Richiesphere

    November 22, 2016 at 10:19 pm

Comments are closed.

%d bloggers like this: