Lion of the Blogosphere

What do Democrats believe?

Earlier today I wrote the following in a comment:

Specifically they [Democrats] cannot believe that Trump, who acts very prole and says things they believe are “racist,” can win an election fair and square. (Although that’s entirely inconsistent with their belief that every white person is “racist.” If every white person is “racist,” then common sense says that in a DEMOCRACY you would get a “racist” president.)

I need to modify that statement. That may be a contradiction for some libtards, but I don’t think that’s what Hillary Clinton and other elite Democrats believe.

Hillary Clinton believes that most white Republican voters are a demographic she calls “deplorables,” and that the deplorables are kept in check because her team controls the media, the lower and higher educational system, and most major corporations.

So what Clinton and other elites cannot believe is not that there are deplorables who would vote for Trump, but that somehow the liberal-controlled propaganda machine broke down and failed to prevent him from winning the presidency.

The contradiction in Clinton’s beliefs is that, for the United States, she believes that democracy only works because the deplorables are kept in check by the powerful elite-controlled establishment. But she and her ilk push for unfettered democratic elections in third world countries which do not have such a powerful propaganda machine to control their deplorables.

Clinton must believe that the problem of deplorables is strictly limited to whites in the United States. Because Muslims and Hispanics are victimized, that makes them inherently virtuous, and thus results from elections in countries where the majority are victimized are not to be feared.

Written by Lion of the Blogosphere

August 31, 2017 at 12:10 PM

Posted in Uncategorized

67 Responses

Subscribe to comments with RSS.

  1. But she and her ilk push for unfettered democratic elections in third world countries

    Usually via “pro-democracy NGOs” which are expected move their home country’s Overton Window in a more globalist, less nationalist direction. The point of unfettering is usually to turn up the heat on leaders considered to be overly nationalist.

    Fiddlesticks

    August 31, 2017 at 12:31 PM

    • That’s why I always encourage non-westerners to join the global culture war and pile on the west.

      Jason Liu

      September 1, 2017 at 3:51 AM

  2. Liberals are not a monolithic block any more than conservatives or Trump voters are a monolithic block. They don’t all believe the same things.

    What I do know is a significant percentage of conservatives get their information from unreliable, highly partisan sources. That is how ideas such as Obama being born in Kenya get started. Many of these highly unreliable sources have been spreading propaganda designed to heighten tensions between races.

    The Republican party since the 1980s has basically become the party of tax cuts for the 1% and corporations. This combined with relaxed rules on corporate mergers has transferred wealth from the working class to the top 1%.

    It is very hard for a political party that appeals only to the top 1% to win democratic elections. To broaden the appeal, the Republican party has used a lot of cultural issues over the years: family values, 2nd amendment, welfare queens, gay marriage, affirmative action, school busing, …. to stroke resentment among white working class and get them to vote Republican against their own economic interests.

    The Republican party has become the party of the top 1% and the party white resentment.

    Donald Trump simply turned the white resentment appeal up a notch.

    The problem Trump faces right now is that the Trump voters who were mainly motivated by white resentment are loving the Trump presidency, but there are a significant number of Trump voters who were not motivated by white resentment. They voted for Trump because they thought he was a good businessman who could make government run better. Most of them are appalled and embarrassed by the Trump presidency.

    Mike CA

    August 31, 2017 at 1:00 PM

    • ” get them to vote Republican against their own economic interests”

      Unlimited immigration is not in the economic interests of the workers. Nor is affirmative action, forced school integration, going soft on minority crime.

      Lion of the Blogosphere

      August 31, 2017 at 1:08 PM

      • I don’t know of any Democrats or liberals who are in favor of “unlimited immigration”. That is a big exaggeration of liberal positions.

        The main disagreement is what to do about the millions of people already here illegally.

        mikeca

        August 31, 2017 at 3:11 PM

      • I don’t know of a single liberal who is in favor of limiting immigration in any way.

        Lion of the Blogosphere

        August 31, 2017 at 4:45 PM

      • mike is right about poor whites voting against their interests when they vote GOP. trump appeared to be an exception to that, but given his healthcare bill and tax reform bill it appears that he’s not an exception.

        the “solid south” used to be solid for the democrats when the democrats were the party of the little man. poor whites in the south voted for the democrats. what changed? the 1964 civil rights bill. southerners are good soldiers, bad thinkers. sad!

        ron burgundy

        August 31, 2017 at 4:08 PM

      • mike is wrong. the resentful whites are leaving trump. trump has so far shown he is just another GOP hack. morris berman pointed out that these resentful whites have guns, and if trump turns out to be just another republican they’ll use them.

        ron burgundy

        August 31, 2017 at 4:15 PM

      • “I don’t know of a single liberal who is in favor of limiting immigration in any way.”

        If by “limiting immigration” you mean reducing legal immigration, that is probably true. There are lots of liberals who are in favor of reducing illegal immigration. I’m certainly in favor of mandatory E-Verify which I think would be much more effective than building the wall. A large percentage of illegals here today entered the US legally and overstayed their visas or are working when their visas does not allow them to work.

        On legal immigration, I would be in favor of shifting the balance more towards high skill immigrants. What I’m not in favor of is reducing the immigration quotas as the Trump administration has proposed. The current rules favoring family are politically popular, so reducing family based immigration for more high skilled immigration is a very difficult political sell.

        Unlimited immigration is essentially what the US had up until the 1920s. That is when visas and immigration quotas were introduced. Being opposed to reducing immigrations quotas does not mean favoring unlimited immigration.

        mikeca

        August 31, 2017 at 5:07 PM

      • “Unlimited immigration is essentially what the US had up until the 1920s. That is when visas and immigration quotas were introduced.”

        The opposite of the truth. For most of our history treaties controlled immigration. Vessels containing immigrants from undesirable nations, or undersirable components of nations otherwise allowed to come, weren’t allowed to dock at our ports. Plus, most potential immigrants were subjects of foreign Kings who first had to agree to let them come (not desired by the many seeking to retain their labor force).

        And, of course, any immigrants coming by land routes would have to deal with potentially hostile American states who might turn them away.

        I was at a seminar not long ago where a fellow made your point, so it appears to be a current talking point among the sub literate Left.

        Curle

        August 31, 2017 at 6:02 PM

      • politicians, like ceos, are very short sighted in america. even the highest skilled should be barred. in the short term this would hurt. in the long term it would be good for the 99%. higher wages for those occupations with a “skills shortage” would encourage more young people to train for these occupations. this would also force the reform of the education system. as it is now, the ruling class have no incentive to fix it. they can just import people.

        ron burgundy

        August 31, 2017 at 6:40 PM

      • “On legal immigration, I would be in favor of shifting the balance more towards high skill immigrants. What I’m not in favor of is reducing the immigration quotas as the Trump administration has proposed.”

        There is absolutely no need for immigration at current levels. Even without getting into the racial/cultural aspect of it, high immigration doesn’t benefit the native-born. People don’t realize that a lot of the problems they complain about are directly exacerbated by our high levels of immigration. The price of housing these days is a great example.

        And many of those problems that immigration is supposed to address are not really due to laziness or stupidity on the part of the American people. Want more STEM graduates? How about we lower the price of attending college? People complain that Americans just won’t do certain types of menial work, but the truth is that our dependence on employer provided health insurance probably has a lot to do with that. Medicaid for all (who want it) might go a long way toward alleviating the insecurity that accompanies holding a lower paid job. And cutting immigration would most certainly raise wages.

        Stealth

        August 31, 2017 at 7:25 PM

      • “The opposite of the truth. For most of our history treaties controlled immigration. Vessels containing immigrants from undesirable nations, or undersirable components of nations otherwise allowed to come, weren’t allowed to dock at our ports. Plus, most potential immigrants were subjects of foreign Kings who first had to agree to let them come (not desired by the many seeking to retain their labor force).”

        In the 19th century it was more difficult for people to get the USA. There certainly were countries where people were prevented from coming to USA, but between 1820 and 1860 almost 2 million immigrated from Ireland. Many of these wee fleeing the Irish Famine (1845-1852). By 1920 more than 4.5 million Irish has immigrated to the USA. In the 1920s immigration quotas vastly reduced Irish immigration.

        Between 1900 and 1930 1.4 million immigrants from Mexico entered the USA by crossing the border which was wide open. Many of these were agriculture works that crossed back and forth between Mexico and USA. In the 1920s Mexicans were required to register and pay fees to cross the border, but many ignored this and crossed without registering or paying. In 1929 crossing the border without registering and paying fees was criminalized.

        Mike CA

        August 31, 2017 at 8:47 PM

      • “On legal immigration, I would be in favor of shifting the balance more towards high skill immigrants.”

        By expanding the supply of skilled labor, a skills-based immigration policy would go a long way toward driving down incomes at the top, thereby reducing income inequality.

        On the flip side, it would also exacerbate the development of an alien ruling class who will find it difficult to empathize with their less advantaged countrymen — something that is difficult to develop even under the best of conditions. We would end up with more Fareed Zakarias, who wrote an entire book about how America should stoically resign itself to a future where his kinsmen in India play an increasingly critical role, rather than devise a path to continued American greatness.

        John D'oh

        August 31, 2017 at 9:02 PM

      • “Many of these wee fleeing the Irish Famine”

        They were fleeing to the US with the express permission of the US and British governments; permission being the exact opposite of unlimited access, your initial and falacious statement. Your initial comment claiming unimpaired admission is particularly bizarre given the debates in congress starting in the 1880s regarding whether to admit Eastern European Jews a debate, oddly enough, led by a US senator from North Carolina and the former confederate governor of that state Zebulon Vance who apparently believed Jewish industriousness could help revive the southern economy.

        Curle

        August 31, 2017 at 11:36 PM

      • “Between 1900 and 1930 1.4 million immigrants from Mexico entered the USA by crossing the border which was wide open.”

        And returning to Mexico and not becoming citizens with many of those attempting to remain being deported by FDR; being deported is pretty good evidence against the unlimited access claim you started out spouting. Haven’t you noticed your fables never hold water? It’s because you get your information from retards.

        Curle

        September 1, 2017 at 12:03 AM

      • mikeca, both the Democrats and the Republican establishment have made it absolutely clear that they’re not interested in offering the Canada-style skills-based immigration policy most of the American public prefers to the status quo. Either could have easily prevented Trump from having a real chance at the presidency by credibly committing to advancing such a policy without reducing the overall immigration level. They both decided, for heavily overlapping reasons, that it was better to risk Trump than to make that sacrifice; that’s how deep their hostility runs.

        Also note that, once we make the switch to a skills-based immigration policy, all evidence indicates it’ll be here to stay for the rest of our lives. Canadians, Australians, and Kiwis are all broadly happy with their immigration laws and enforcement; to the extent that there’s dissent, it’s mostly just quibbling around the edges, there’s nothing like the populist anger which has afflicted many other Western countries.

        In light of this, an initial reduction in the overall immigration level is a trivial price to pay, and easy enough to correct later when the new batch of immigrants is clearly assimilating better than the old. In the long run, the higher-value the immigrants are, the more public support there is for immigration. Again, look at Canada, which elected Trudeau not too long ago when so many other countries were moving in the opposite direction.

        (Should this fail to happen, well, I’m a nonwhite immigrant who can blend in more easily elsewhere, and I have zero interest in staying around to watch everything slowly degrade to Brazilian levels of functionality. But America still has the potential to be the greatest for a long time to come, and Trump, for all his flaws, has the right instincts where it counts most.)

        DB

        September 1, 2017 at 2:46 AM

      • mikeca I don’t know of any Democrats or liberals who are in favor of “unlimited immigration”. That is a big exaggeration of liberal positions.

        The main disagreement is what to do about the millions of people already here illegally.

        Tell us, mikeca, if you don’t believe in “unlimited immigration” then just what is the limit? There are currently over 100M foreigners living in America. 85M with citizenship and at least 15M more illegal. How many more millions should there be? 50M more? 100M more? 200M more? What exactly is the limit? The truth is you have no limit, And you’d amnesty anyone who managed to sneak in or overstay a visa as well.

        destructure

        September 1, 2017 at 11:49 AM

      • “I don’t know of any Democrats or liberals who are in favor of “unlimited immigration”. That is a big exaggeration of liberal positions.”

        That’s simply not true. The Primary debates between Hillary and Bernie, established that the mainstream Democratic Party position on immigration is basically Wet foot / Dry foot. If you get here, you can stay. That’s literally the basis of “comprehensive immigration reform.” I don’t think there is a mainstream Democrat in favor deporting someone simply for being in the country illegally. If that’s not open borders, I don’t know what is.

        Mike Street Station

        September 1, 2017 at 7:10 PM

    • The liberal infiltration and control of the federal court system is the biggest hurdle President Trump must overcome to MAGA. They block everything he does every chance they get.

      cesqy

      August 31, 2017 at 1:45 PM

      • On the other hand, appointing conservative judges will most likely be Trump’s biggest and longest-lasting accomplishment as President.

        Lion of the Blogosphere

        August 31, 2017 at 3:09 PM

    • “Many of these highly unreliable sources have been spreading propaganda designed to heighten tensions between races.”

      No reason to bring the Washington Post, New York Times and CNN into the equation.

      Curle

      August 31, 2017 at 2:44 PM

    • Good old Mike CA. Always a reliable barometer of pseudo-rational Globalist propaganda.

      peterike

      August 31, 2017 at 3:07 PM

      • Trolling 101: when you don’t have a response that makes sense, post a few lines of snarky of nonsense.

        mikeca

        August 31, 2017 at 3:21 PM

    • Yeah, take me for example. I actually believe that 90% of the whites who’ve been murdered or have suffered serious brain injuries on the street over the last 20 years were attacked by blacks. But I’m probably relying on the wrong sources.

      Explainer 21

      August 31, 2017 at 4:11 PM

      • Is that actually possible? I mean, when you say, “on the street” do you mean “on the street in NYC?” Also, are you referring to more or less random street crime (as opposed to bar fights, neighborhood murders, etc)?

        I can understand if someone says, “In NYC there is a significant amount of black on white street crime, including strong arm robberies, murders and other violent acts.”

        But, as a percentage, it would be really tough for me to pin down. Couldn’t possibly be 90 pct. Most blacks commit crimes against other blacks because they live in segregated neighborhoods.

        The Shepherd

        August 31, 2017 at 11:16 PM

    • what’s a liberal? what’s a conservative? words and things are the same mike.

      the answer is conservative and liberal are names of sports teams. the game they play is fooling the people into believing their enemies are other powerless people.

      whoever uses these terms should be suspected of believing that professional wrestling is real.

      ron burgundy

      August 31, 2017 at 4:21 PM

      • are the same for mike.

        they aren’t the same in the real world.

        ron burgundy

        August 31, 2017 at 4:22 PM

    • ” That is how ideas such as Obama being born in Kenya get started”

      It started with Hillary.

      Lion o' the Turambar

      August 31, 2017 at 4:48 PM

      • Yes, and it wasn’t helped by the fact that Obama made much of his Kenya connections growing up; a matter of common knowledge among his HS classmates.

        Curle

        August 31, 2017 at 7:04 PM

    • “Liberals are not a monolithic block any more than conservatives or Trump voters are a monolithic block.”

      Yes they are. It is of no consequence what individual liberals believe if ninety-eight percent of them vote for the same candidates and publicly espouse the same ideology. It’s your behavior, not what you think, that makes you a bloc. Liberals are instinctive conformists who deeply believe that individual convictions should be set aside for the good of the team. And civilized liberals always yield to the extremists and kooks in their ranks.

      “They don’t all believe the same things.”

      The vast majority do. As time passes, there are fewer and fewer issues on which liberals are allowed to form their own opinions. Once left-wing activists and politicians settle on an official position, the memo goes out, and everyone is expected to toe the line. Liberals like to think they’re independent thinkers, but nothing could be further from the truth. Anyone who deviates will be bullied into compliance with accusations of bigotry.

      Stealth

      August 31, 2017 at 7:10 PM

      • That’s been my observation as well. On the left, the main disagreements simply result in the speed of movement, not the movement itself. Bernie and Hillary’s disagreements were a matter of how much and how soon, not on substance.

        Mike Street Station

        September 1, 2017 at 7:12 PM

    • “The Republican party has become the party of the top 1% and the party white resentment.”

      And the Democratic party has become the party of the top 1% and the party of minority/LGBT/single women resentment.”

      Sgt. Joe Friday

      August 31, 2017 at 7:35 PM

  3. Maybe she feels like belonging to an international elite and despising 99.x% of the world. Then, she thinks that the average american doesn’t deserve to be treated better as any person borned in the entire world.

    And it would be much better to control the people if you had no sense of national entitlement coming from people who believes (rightly for me) that they country is an asset that must be protected and that gives them rights and duties.

    So she would despize average and low class white for pretending to get any advantage she doesn’t think they deserve : that’s why their are deplorables in her eyes.

    It’s more of a globalist elitism than a love for black, latinos or asian.

    Bruno

    August 31, 2017 at 1:24 PM

  4. “libtards”

    Maybe I was wrong about milquetoast countenance, LotB!

    IHTG

    August 31, 2017 at 1:33 PM

    • I wanted to distinguish the smart liberals from the not-so-smart.

      Lion of the Blogosphere

      August 31, 2017 at 1:40 PM

      • If you dislike proles than you hate the party of the right. If you dislike the non-cerebral types, then the Republican party is definitely not for you, although most American liberals are dumb as a bag of bricks.

        JS

        August 31, 2017 at 3:21 PM

      • JS is still mad that his people lost the spanish american war, still mad after the epic fail of the spanish armada in 1588. if he thinks lacan is an intellectual, then he’s more anti-intellectual than trumpistas.

        ron burgundy

        August 31, 2017 at 5:43 PM

      • A nationalist doesn’t dislike proles, non-cerebrals, brainiacs, or any other group, because it take all types to make a nation and everyone has, or rather should have, his place in society. This is very simple.

        Yakov

        August 31, 2017 at 7:35 PM

      • French Psychoanalyst Lacan made 2 poignant points regarding Americans before his death in 1981, which couldn’t be more true than today.

        1) Americans are slaves to the capitalists.

        2) Americans are dead asleep.

        JS

        August 31, 2017 at 9:05 PM

      • It’s quite easy for America’s Whites in the sticks to transcend to another identity. But they refuse to do so, hence they deserve their fate.

        Alex Jones coined the term prison planet, which is referring to his White trash followers who are unable to evolve and adapt to changes, hence they are stuck in their own misery.

        JS

        August 31, 2017 at 9:09 PM

      • And how free is America? America is conservative to say the least.

        I find run in the mill magazine covers in Québec with women and their bare titties, some covers where women are bottomless, instead of topless. This is European style.

        In America, we call it smut porn.

        There is no smut in Western Continental European culture, when it comes to naked women.

        America is a terrible place for human expression. Call it the PC culture!

        JS

        August 31, 2017 at 9:16 PM

      • JS, stop pretending to be a moron already.

        Yakov

        August 31, 2017 at 11:10 PM

      • Don’t know if some people from the MSM is reading Lion’s blog.

        But clearly my constant drivel about the failings of the Anglo Prole Sphere has hit a home run:

        Britain and America feel more unstable than I’ve ever seen them before

        http://www.independent.co.uk/voices/britain-brexit-unstable-jeremy-corbyn-theresa-may-donald-trump-anti-establishment-a7877481.html#commentsDiv

        Let’s face it, the Anglo Cesspool Sphere is just a money grubbing hole, and more true today, when the elites think out of control immigration and multipluralism signify bigger business leading to bigger profits.

        JS

        September 1, 2017 at 4:32 PM

  5. Leftists believe that a large majority of the people are, basically, fascists, and that the people must never really be allowed to rule even though they give endless lip service to the idea of democracy.

    CamelCaseRob

    August 31, 2017 at 1:56 PM

    • I think they believe that for white people, but not for victimized people like Muslims, blacks, Hispanics, and indigenous people, who are virtuous on account of their victimization.

      Lion of the Blogosphere

      August 31, 2017 at 3:11 PM

    • leftists don’t exist in the US. what are called leftists are two types. the first type is the rich who use identity politics to distract from economic issues and distance themselves from “racist” proles. the second type are the dimwits who believe in the propaganda of the first type.

      ron burgundy

      August 31, 2017 at 4:02 PM

  6. Hillary thinks if nothing except proving herself worthy to the cold distant father who ignored her. She’s so programmed by this insicurity that long dead Hugh still controls her from the grave.

    Curle

    August 31, 2017 at 2:40 PM

  7. What do they believe? I’ll tell you what they believe: The Democrats, including the US social democrats, sure don’t believe in Democracy. They’ve been opposing Libertarian efforts to bring state-level direct democracy on the constitution (as in Florida), county legislatures, and local town-hall democracy for decades.

    The Democrats attacks on recent free speech rallies is simply more of the same. They love the people. it’s just individuals they can’t like.

    rob

    August 31, 2017 at 3:10 PM

    • I agree.

      The foremost thing they believe is that if Elites(in Bob Dole’s awkward phrase) ran everything it would be be “better”. Right schools, right credentials, in with the right groups.

      Whats the point in waiting for people you dont like anyway to agree with you?

      The know that some of their policies would seldom get democratic approval and hence they are in favor stealth, undemocratic techniques. Decisions forced by treaties, international agreements. Court orders and departmental decisions. Obfuscated legal codes.

      Look at how much Thomas Freidman pines for China where they can get things done! Thats the model of the modern Democrat.

      Lion o' the Turambar

      August 31, 2017 at 5:01 PM

  8. I really disagree with you here.

    Not that I’m defending Hillary. I bow to no one in my Hillary hatred, but I think she thinks that most Republicans are nice, somewhat dimwitted people who just haven’t gotten woke yet. She was born into such a Republican family, and thinks she knows them well. They live lives of unconscious privilege and go on living their robotic lives in their little cocoons, etc. In her estimation, she’d have ended up a Goldwater girl to the end if she hadn’t had the privilege of her Wellesley education, and then Yale. Think of it, if she had gone to State U, she’d have stayed a Republican.

    I think she thinks that the Deplorables are a nasty lot who have fired people’s imaginations because…well, I doubt she has the imagination to understand that they may have a point. Bill does, but she doesn’t.

    Does anybody here watch Blackish? Worth taking out the DVDs?

    gothamette

    August 31, 2017 at 3:20 PM

    • Yes, there is a lot to this. Certainly Hillary is a politician, not an ideaologue, so you have to distinguish between her personal beliefs and her political positions. On a personal level, what do we really know? She grew up Republican, then became a Democrat in college, started banging other ambitious leftist types, got a Yale law degree, then became obsessed with money and power. Not such an unusual trajectory, except that her personal greed and corruption became rather extreme.

      In any case, a very different character than Sanders, who really wanted to introduce free tuition and other benefits for middle class and lower class Americans.

      Hillary, as we know, employed unpaid black prison labor at the governor’s mansion in Little Rock. In some circles, these people are referred to as slaves. Say what you will, it certainly indicates a great deal of mental flexibility.

      The Shepherd

      August 31, 2017 at 11:28 PM

    • I reviewed Black-ish back when it first came out and thought it was terrible. But it’s still going strong in the ratings, while the far superior Carmichael Show was canceled. The lesson? I shouldn’t be a TV reviewer.

      Mike Street Station

      September 1, 2017 at 7:18 PM

  9. to suppose that hillary thinks anything except, “how can i get elected?” is too charitable.

    ron burgundy

    August 31, 2017 at 3:58 PM

    • Well, if she wanted to get elected, that “deplorables” comment was certainly a bad idea. So that’s a window into her thinking.

      Lion of the Blogosphere

      August 31, 2017 at 4:46 PM

      • but what she meant by “deplorables” was “white-trash losers who hate jews”.

        it’s name calling and classism not thought.

        ron burgundy

        August 31, 2017 at 5:48 PM

      • “but what she meant by “deplorables” was “white-trash losers who hate jews”.

        You should expand the deplorables hate list to include blacks, illegals, Muslims and women. That rounds out the victim brigade.

        Lewis Medlock

        September 1, 2017 at 9:48 AM

  10. I don’t think she believes anything at all, other than that being in government is the only way for a woman to make big money.

    Marty

    August 31, 2017 at 4:15 PM

  11. Most people simply vote for whichever party will benefit them personally. Among the minority that actually care about the country, or the even smaller number that care about such lofty things as the future of humanity, they are basically divided based on where they fall on the nature versus nurture argument. People who think that nature mainly shapes the person are conservative, and those that think its nurture are liberal. I used to be liberal, but when I learnt about HBD I became conservative in a pretty short time.

    DataExplorer

    August 31, 2017 at 9:36 PM

    • True for the first part of your comment, but you’re delusional to think that conservatives stand on the nature side. Most conservatives are that way because they believe in individual responsibility and willpower.

      Thomas

      September 1, 2017 at 6:53 PM

  12. Very valid points.

    IroniQ

    September 6, 2017 at 10:24 AM


Comments are closed.

%d bloggers like this: