Lion of the Blogosphere

Trump can’t possibly win re-election

This is largely a re-hash of what I wrote three months ago.

It doesn’t matter that the vast majority of people who voted for Trump in 2016 and who are still alive will vote for him again. It doesn’t matter that prole whites who loved him in 2016 still love him in 2020.

Trump’s strongest support comes from senior citizens. Senior citizens die, and their vote gets replaced with young people who are a lot less white and even among the whites they are a lot more liberal and lot more anti-Trump than their grandparents.

Trump supporters continuously underestimate the power of fakestream media propaganda. With 24/7 anti-Trump reporting for four years, I don’t see how any people who voted for Hillary in 2016 are going to vote for Trump in 2020. Trump’s success in 2016 came from flipping the prole whites who traditionally voted Democratic, but I don’t see any more of those voters flipping in 2020.

College educated white voters with above-average household incomes, who have traditionally voted Republican because Republicans give them lower taxes, have been trending away from the Republican Party for the last two decades, and this trend looks to accelerate more in 2020. I have called these Republicans nose-holders, they vote Republican for the lower taxes while holding their nose so they don’t smell the stink of Republican policies they disagree with. Every year, more of these people stop being single-issue voters on taxes and flip to the Democratic side. And in 2020, the stink of Trump will be extra-strong to these voters.

Polls show potential Democratic challengers like Warren, Sanders or Biden with a huge lead over Trump, and even if 2% of that lead is composed of “shy Trump voters” who will vote Trump in 2020, that’s not enough for Trump to surmount what the polls are telling us.

Right now the economy is as good as it’s going to get. It can only get worse as the juice from the Trump tax cuts for big corporations and the top 1% wears off. Plus, if you look away from the stock market indexes, the economy isn’t very good for young people who didn’t graduate from elite colleges. Furthermore, if there is such a thing as the Illuminati, they will try to crash the stock market before the election. (Of course, the Illuminati thing is just conspiracy theorizing.)

* * *

In 2016, the polling average showed a 3.2% edge for Clinton, while the actual election results were a 2.1% win in the popular vote, which was not enough to overcome Trump’s electoral college advantage, which was very close in key swing states such as Pennsylvania. (Polls weren’t as unreliable as assumed, people were just looking at them at the national level instead of at the swing-state level.)

We can interpret this as meaning that if polls show a 4% advantage or more for the Democratic challenger, that means the polls are predicting a Trump loss. The most recent Fox News poll shows that Trump loses by 10% to either Biden or Warren, and by 9% to Sanders. State-level polls all are showing a similar reversal of Trump’s fortunes. Last week, an Iowa poll shows that Trump would beat Biden or Warren by 2 points. That sounds good, except for the fact that Trump beat Hillary in Iowa by 9.5 points 2016.

Also, Iowa is a Rustbelt state [at least partially in the Rustbelt], and the prole whites in Iowa are like the prole whites in Wisconsin, Michigan and Pennsylvania where Trump won in squeaker elections. Trump’s loss of support in Iowa is a strong predictor of Trump losing those key swing states in 2020. Unlike Hillary Clinton, who stupidly barely campaigned in those states, you can be sure the Warren or Biden or Sanders will be all over those states in 2020.

Written by Lion of the Blogosphere

October 21, 2019 at 9:33 AM

Posted in Politics

159 Responses

Subscribe to comments with RSS.

  1. Hehe: Gravitas.

    Andrew E.

    October 21, 2019 at 9:52 AM

    • I am not as pessimistic. I think some people who voted for Hillary will vote for Trump this time. Especially if Warren is the nominee, some of the high income suburbanites who have been trending Democrat in recent years will vote for Trump. Some big Dem donors have publicly said they will. Warren’s rhetoric is too threatening for them. At the same time they got a huge tax cut from Trump and life has been good with him. I also think he will pick up some minority votes, especially Hispanics…not the newer immigrants but the English speaking Americanized ones who are similar in many ways to prole whites.

      Being the incumbent is always an advantage. Anybody who is reasonably happy with how things are going for themselves may not want to risk change. As far as the polls are concerned…it’s way too early. The Trump campaign will exploit the weaknesses of whoever their opponent is and they will have a big budget to do so. I am not saying Trump wins for sure but it’s not a done deal that he will lose.

      Jay Fink

      October 21, 2019 at 2:27 PM

    • In flagrante delicto.

      gothamette

      October 21, 2019 at 7:21 PM

    • “Just spoke to @MittRomney on the phone, and asked him about Pierre Delecto. His only response: ‘C’est moi.'”

      Men who have sex with other men are less gay than Mitt Romney.

      Lowe

      October 21, 2019 at 9:47 PM

      • I just learned that Shepard Fairey’s father’s name is Strait Fairey.

        gothamette

        October 22, 2019 at 11:59 AM

  2. You’re kinda low energy recently Lion. How about a post making fun of Pierre Delecto or something

    IHTG

    October 21, 2019 at 9:54 AM

  3. Trump’s secret weapon is Hillary Clinton. Every time she opens her mouth she damages the Democrats, and for some reason she seems to have decided the time is right for her to start spouting off again.

    Peter Akuleyev

    October 21, 2019 at 10:08 AM

    • I dunno. We think the Democrats are being hurt by her crazy Russian asset statements, but CNN and MSNBC both covered it as if it was a real thing, without any irony. If they thought it was damaging they would never have mentioned it.

      Mike Street Station

      October 22, 2019 at 6:03 AM

  4. Let’s talk about how Trump will get beat when there’s reason to think Biden will be nominated. Warren is so profoundly weak as a candidate, it’s hard for me to take your arguments seriously. All it takes for him to win is low Democrat turnout. Warren is like a godsend in that respect. As good as it could get for him.

    Lowe

    October 21, 2019 at 10:14 AM

    • Just another troll post, ignore. Lion stated not long ago that he was out of things to write about; these anti-trump posts are all he’s got these days

      driveallnight

      October 21, 2019 at 1:51 PM

      • This is not an anti-Trump post, this is a voter analysis post.

        I stand by my previous post about why you should vote for Trump: https://lionoftheblogosphere.wordpress.com/2016/10/25/why-you-should-vote-for-trump/

        Lion of the Blogosphere

        October 21, 2019 at 1:55 PM

      • This is an anti-Trump blog plain and simple. It might be pro-Republican but beyond that little else. There is also a human psychological inclination toward negativity despite all the evidence to the contrary. Plus news commentators have to prove they’re “independent” which means falsely exaggerating negativity.

        Every president is condemned by the media some worse than others however the president also has massive media power in fact media power might be the presidency’s greatest advantage.

        The president’s core base is what matters as well as the party structure plus the fact he controls a massive police state terror apparatus and one of the world’s biggest military juggernauts. The president also represents the country internationally so the advantages of incumbency plus the fact that things are going mostly well suggests Lion is wrong about Trump as usual.

        Younger people I’ve come across are very anti-PC unlike older people they never saw the fruits of a good economy, good schools, or any other positive aspect of America garbage that still effects some millennials.

        redarmyvodka

        October 21, 2019 at 5:36 PM

  5. I have money in PredictIt that Blompf loses. Anyone saying he’ll certainly win should buy:

    https://www.predictit.org/markets/detail/3698/Who-will-win-the-2020-US-presidential-election

    Alexander Turok

    October 21, 2019 at 10:16 AM

    • Looks like there’s some arbitrage opportunities there.

      Lion of the Blogosphere

      October 21, 2019 at 10:25 AM

      • Blompf is the hard core alt right word for Trump. They hate him because they think he’s owned by the Jews.

        gothamette

        October 21, 2019 at 1:09 PM

      • Blompf as in bloated, bloviating bozo.

        Alexander Turok

        October 21, 2019 at 4:04 PM

      • Who do you think could do a better job than Trump? Trump struggles against perfection but he does great against everyone else.

        redarmyvodka

        October 21, 2019 at 5:38 PM

      • “Who do you think could do a better job than Trump?”

        Ted Cruz.

        Lion of the Blogosphere

        October 21, 2019 at 7:07 PM

      • Ted Cruz.

        Hah, now we know Lion is trolling. Ted telegraphs his moves from miles away. Nothing easier for the deep state than a stationary target.

        Andrew E.

        October 21, 2019 at 7:12 PM

      • “Ted telegraphs his moves from miles away. Nothing easier for the deep state than a stationary target.”

        As opposed to Trump, who doesn’t move at all, just erratically talks about moving on Twitter. I agree with Lion, Ted Cruz would be much better than Trump.

        Alexander Turok

        October 21, 2019 at 7:22 PM

      • Ted Cruz would be much better than Trump.

        Cruz stone cold knows he’s Constitutionally ineligible to be president but he looked the other way and fudged the argument because it was in his personal interest to do so. Cruz would have come cheaper than even Bernie proved out when the chips were down. He would have been owned totally.

        Andrew E.

        October 21, 2019 at 7:47 PM

      • Ted Cruz is controlled opposition. The fact you cucks support him says a lot.

        Both Lion and Turok are just craving liberal and mainstream media validation.

        Hate to break it to you but society is run by elites that means multi-billionaires.

        In other words nobody other than Trump could make a dent in the system at all.

        redarmyvodka

        October 21, 2019 at 8:40 PM

      • “Blompf is the hard core alt right word for Trump. They hate him because they think he’s owned by the Jews.”

        gothamette

        October 21, 2019 at 10:32 PM

      • “Blompf is the hard core alt right word for Trump. They hate him because they think he’s owned by the Jews”.

        I like your posts Gothamette, but that analysis is wishful thinking born out of a wish for a non-existent divergence between “alt” right endorsement and your endorsement for the highest office.

        The truth is that the “alt” right is pretty much the mainstream right and has always been for the base (right wing definition does not hinge on friendliness toward Jews in a country with a 300 million person population). They put Trump in office and will keep him in office in 2020.

        The Right Wing base in this nation is defined by ethnic loyalty. Full stop. As it has always been for all nations throughout history. The fundamentals of politics have not changed, in spite of surface level efforts to change them and hard efforts to proclaim them changed. In the post WWII period, that essential definition was desperately covered up with a strong attempt to redefine it, but that effort was always doomed for numerous fundamental reasons.

        Some members of the Right Wing base in this nation like Jews and some don’t. Just like some Jews in majority Jewish Israel like European gentiles as a group and some don’t. The “alt” Right Wing here is no more alt than the Right Wing in Israel.

        The “Blompf” stuff is 6th grade level dorkishness. I’m embarrassed for any adult who writes it as an aspersion, as doing so is its own punishment for their dignity. That may not even be a small comfort, except to know that there are plenty of Right Wing gentiles feeling embarrassed for the so called “alt right” Trump haters along with you.

        Mike

        October 22, 2019 at 1:58 AM

      • “In other words nobody other than Trump could make a dent in the system at all.”

        Exactly what is this guy’s talent? He’s a billionaire, but he was born rich. The only arguable talent he had was the talent to win in 2016, he certainly doesn’t show any governing skills. Who do you think would win if presented with a test of objective facts about how the federal government works, Trump or Cruz?

        “The “Blompf” stuff is 6th grade level dorkishness. I’m embarrassed for any adult who writes it as an aspersion, as doing so is its own punishment for their dignity. ”

        The guy who looks like a 6th grade level dork is the President. They say never to wrestle with a pig – it gets mud all over you and the pig likes it, but I disagree. The average idiot is motivated by simple slogans and appeals to spite and prestige. He wants to associate with high status groups and doesn’t want to associate with low-status groups. Your well reasoned, politely argued manifesto about men’s rights will never be as potent as “feminists are fat lol.” The key to winning is a combination of reasoned arguments for the reasonable and ad hominem attacks for the masses.

        Alexander Turok

        October 22, 2019 at 7:38 PM

      • I think that Trump made some smart real-estate investments when he was younger. Of course, his dad taught him the ropes and gave him seed money, but still he did way better than most rich kids.

        Lion of the Blogosphere

        October 22, 2019 at 10:58 PM

    • PredictIt is garbage. These markets are too thinly traded to be accurate.

      map

      October 21, 2019 at 6:06 PM

  6. It’s hard to say. Trump’s popularity is sinking, but both Biden and Warren have major flaws: Biden’s age, and Warren’s lack of detail on how she’ll pay for health care expansion without massive tax increases.
    Biden may be able to overcome the age issue if he stays healthy, and he also can point out that Trump’s just a few years younger. Warren probably can make a convincing case that big tax increases are worth it if they solve the health care crisis.
    So I’d say it’s still too early to be sure of anything. My guess is that Trump will lose, but much can happen in the next year

    Also, Iowa is not a Rust Belt state.

    Peter

    ironrailsironweights

    October 21, 2019 at 10:26 AM

    • Eastern Iowa is considered in the Rustbelt.

      Iowa is on the border between the Rustbelt and the Midwest farming belt.

      I suppose you could also say that Iowa is the heart of the Cornbelt.

      Lion of the Blogosphere

      October 21, 2019 at 10:33 AM

      • Speaking of aging out of relevance, how old is the term ‘rustblet’?

        CMC

        October 21, 2019 at 11:30 AM

      • Eastern Iowa is considered part of the Rust Belt?

        In what universe, good sir? In what universe?

        njguy73

        October 21, 2019 at 11:35 AM

      • The Wikipedia universe.

        Lion of the Blogosphere

        October 21, 2019 at 12:19 PM

      • Whatever “citation needed” is wrong. Iowa is wholly Breadbasket. The Foundry starts in northern Illinois and Eastern Washington.

        What’s the diff, you ask? Here’s the answer: the Foundry suffered due to globalization, while the Breadbasket prospered. Our steel exports declined while our grain exports soared.

        njguy73

        October 21, 2019 at 1:34 PM

      • “Speaking of aging out of relevance, how old is the term ‘rustblet’?”

        Says someone who’s never lived there.

        MoreSigmasThanYou

        October 21, 2019 at 1:12 PM

      • Make that “northern Illinois and Eastern Wisconsin” Most of Wisconsin is Dairyland, except Milwaukee/Green Bay, and Illinois is mostly agricultural except for the greater Chicago area.

        njguy73

        October 21, 2019 at 4:10 PM

    • Ouch!

      Rust belt.

      CMC

      October 21, 2019 at 11:31 AM

    • MoreSigmas,

      My understanding of the term ‘rust belt,’ and the way Lion uses it here, is that it’s a de-industrialized region, significantly populated by Democrat/union/Reagan-Democrat voters who historically deferred to or instinctively voted Democrat; and that the betrayal/loss of jobs partly motivated such voters to persist in or return to historical deference or instinct or whatever.

      My critique is that this was a useful term when the de-industrialization and hence betrayal was _recent_, i.e. 1988, 1992… and that as time goes by that phenomena fades. In short, people get over it. Further, if the 2016 was a watershed event where the usual GOP/DEM rules or axis or whatever stopped holding (it was), then maybe the term, to the extent it signals a certain political phenomena, is less relevant —regardless of how many old factories are still out there, rusting.

      What’s the crowd size situation in Iowa, Trump rallies vs. Biden conference room visits and Warren truck stops?

      But anyway, on second thought, this is all secondary. The real issue with this post is ‘how trustworthy are the polls.’

      CMC

      October 21, 2019 at 5:37 PM

      • I never got the “Reagan Democrat” thing. You vote Republican at the top of the ticket, you’re not a Democrat anymore.

        Anthony

        October 23, 2019 at 8:54 AM

      • “I never got the “Reagan Democrat” thing”

        How old are you? It seems to me that people who don’t personally remember the Reagan era don’t get it at all.

        Lion of the Blogosphere

        October 23, 2019 at 10:47 AM

      • No. You heard about it years ago. The jobs disappeared. Then the news coverage about the jobs disappearing also disappeared. Because the news coverage disappeared you imagine that the problem being covered also disappeared.

        I saw a guy get screwed out of his pension 6 months before he retired. That was a long time ago, but he still lives 10 miles from his old office. You think he’s “over it” when he has to pay bills at the end of the month? Try spending a day driving through Detroit or Flint Michigan. Or if you don’t want to leave New York State, you can try walking through the downtown of Newburgh, or Schenectady. Tell me if the people who live in those places are “over it”. Those places are worse now than they were in 1988, and everyone who lives there suffers from the effects.

        MoreSigmasThanYou

        October 23, 2019 at 1:28 PM

  7. I think Lion is wrong here. The PredictIt odds, narrowly favoring Democrats, still seem to be about right if things hold steady. There’s a lot more that can go against the Republicans though (namely the economy).

    If Warren wins the primary and continues to push a socialist agenda (and it’s harder and harder now for politicians to tack center after the primary), there are still powerful forces that want to block that. Trump is annoying for them to listen to, but he is weak and controlled.

    I have to think some of the LGBTQ+ nonsense, pronouns, the white-bashing, male-bashing, etc., won’t work in the Democrats’ favor, and you just have to publicize what they’re saying among themselves. Their thoughts on gender strike me as literally insane, but maybe the whole world has lost its mind.

    Wency

    October 21, 2019 at 10:36 AM

    • Where do you get this nonsense from? Trump will be reelected easily.

      He’s already defeated and destroyed anyone who opposed him so far.

      In the past this was called the divine right of kings/mandate of heaven.

      redarmyvodka

      October 21, 2019 at 7:44 PM

      • “In the past this was called the divine right of kings/mandate of heaven”.

        I’ve seen that concept (mis)used several times and in different locations on the internet recently. Did some right wing pundit recently print an article on it or something?

        The Mandate of Heaven was one hundred percent invented as an imperial Chinese cultural and legal tool to prevent a perceived ethnic-interest conflict between an imperial foreign ruler (ie: Han in origin) and the disparate tribes within the imperial kingdom. It was meant to deter disobedience and revolt within a kingdom because any one subservient tribe was not ruled by an Emperor from their lineage.

        Its mechanism was to remove a rulership requirement for ethnic lineage and convey it instead to moral behavior of the ruler. In theory, if the ruler behaved morally he was then granted and retained the “Mandate of Heaven”. In practice, I’m sure that it worked out differently.

        The concept purely a political invention of both imperialism and the Chinese.

        Its strange to witness Western Right Wing individuals repeatedly cite what is wholly an imperialist (anti-borders) Chinese concept. It leaves me wondering if they are aware of its geographic origins, never-mind its political purpose.

        Mike

        October 22, 2019 at 2:14 AM

      • The mandate of heaven is applicable to our own time as well. The Mandate of Heaven is a legitimate concept and was created to explain the rise and fall of dynasties which the Chinese had witnessed across their history. Marxism believes in a similar concept where old elites are replaced by new ones in a never ending cycle of progress.

        https://eradica.wordpress.com/2014/05/06/old-and-new-gods/

        redarmyvodka

        October 24, 2019 at 11:43 PM

  8. I sadly agree with everything you write here, Lion. Even a bad Democrat candidate should beat Trump in 2020. Hillary could do it. Walter Mondale could do it. Shifting demographics, the underestimated effectiveness of media and education system propaganda, and the fiercely tribal nature of modern American politics make Republican victory improbable.

    My only hope is my own incompetence in predicting elections. I picked Clinton to win (I voted Trump) in 2016, so don’t give up out there!

    Ledford Ledford

    October 21, 2019 at 10:44 AM

    • What about Dukakis?

      Vipltd

      October 21, 2019 at 2:13 PM

      • Well, we have Mayor Gay Dukakis in the race, so maybe we’ll find out.

        Ledford Ledford

        October 21, 2019 at 4:37 PM

    • Trump will win. Just like Hillary, Warren turns off legions of minorities (especially men) with her shrillness and lectures. Some of them will vote for Trump because they prefer macho, but a large number won’t show up.

      370H55V

      October 22, 2019 at 3:04 PM

  9. As a black man. Let me just say that the black vote will be solidly behind Booker or Harris come what may. I am PHYSICALLY SICK of democrats and republicans talking down to us because of our low IQs and love of KFC. We need a candidate who can stand up for the black community and make us the leading contender for every Oscar category.

    The Social Justice Warrior

    October 21, 2019 at 11:15 AM

    • Even the fake black guy won’t pretend he likes Warren. It’s a bridge too far.

      Lowe

      October 21, 2019 at 12:31 PM

      • Spot on. If you wanted to create a candidate repellent to black males it would be difficult to to improve upon Warren.

        gazza90

        October 21, 2019 at 12:50 PM

  10. You need to get out of cynical New York and breathe some fresh mid-west country air.

    Roli

    October 21, 2019 at 11:25 AM

    • There are not enough proles that are in about NYC that makes Lion sad. The Midwest is prole haven, which is worse.

      Ok, what, who's this again?

      October 21, 2019 at 12:24 PM

  11. Trump’s other big advantage is oil prices. A surprising (to elites) number of people view the “economy” in terms of whether or not they can afford to fill up the tank this week. Gasoline at the tank is cheaper than it was for most of the Obama era, especially when combined with modest wage growth.

    Peter Akuleyev

    October 21, 2019 at 11:31 AM

  12. Wait until after the Democrat convention and Trump has an actual opponent, then we’ll see how things look. Also, Trump has been under incessant fire for 4-1/2 years from all of one party, half his own, and 90% of the media. The surprise is not that he’s behind all the Democrats, the surprise is that he’s as close as he is.

    And I agree with Wency. I get it that you have to appeal to your base for the primaries, and then try to run towards the center in the general election, but some of the stuff that the Democrats have been saying is so absolutely bat shit crazy that it causes me to wonder how in the world they’re going to walk some of this stuff back.

    Sgt. Joe Friday

    October 21, 2019 at 11:42 AM

    • Some of the far-Left stuff is crazy and will repel voters, but other parts of it are popular, like expanding social security benefits. Even the “green” stuff is not unpopular as long as it’s paired with “the oil companies will pay for it.” Remember that the average moron knows nothing about economics or technology: if Warren tells him she’ll get oil companies to provide carbon-free gasoline for half the price, he’ll believe her and think only “corporate greed” stands in the way of her doing so.

      Alexander Turok

      October 21, 2019 at 4:26 PM

      • Oh? You mean medicare for the entire planet, including every illegal alien that washes up over the border? That’s popular?

        Clearly, Democrats think everyone in the world is an American, and that real Americans should be taxed to pay for the world’s healthcare.

        map

        October 21, 2019 at 6:15 PM

      • It’s not popular to provide illegal aliens with healthcare. If there were someone running on universal healthcare for American citizens only, they’d win in a landslide. But no one like that’s running, the Dems only need to be more popular than the current system which the Republicans call “free market” healthcare.*

        *It’s not really “free market” but to the Republican Party is not really about the free market.See https://www.econlib.org/archives/2013/03/the_high_price.html for an example of a free-market reform the Republicans will not do because it will threaten the high income of doctors)

        Alexander Turok

        October 21, 2019 at 7:20 PM

      • That Bryan Caplan article is fake news. It’s a textbook example of not passing Steve Sailer’s Ctrl-F “m-i-g-r…” test. He displays a graph titled “New M.D.s/Million Persons” and uses its flatness/decline over the past 30 years to show that we don’t have enough new doctors. Yet if you click back to his source data, it’s a table showing number of MD degrees granted in the USA every year. Now, been to a hospital lately? You can’t turn around without seeing an Indian doctor. It’s even worse than I thought: almost a third of doctors in America are foreign-born! So, we haven’t increased the number of medical school seats in America to keep up with our population… but we’ve made up for it by mass-importing foreign doctors.

        Of course, the population growth resulting in this alleged need for more doctors is itself immigration-driven, so we’re like the little old lady who swallowed a fly.

        Hermes

        October 21, 2019 at 11:14 PM

      • “It’s not popular to provide illegal aliens with healthcare. If there were someone running on universal healthcare for American citizens only, they’d win in a landslide. ”

        Yet, no one is running on that. Instead, they are running on programs to rundown the average American…because…fundamentally…Democrats hate America.

        map

        October 22, 2019 at 2:13 AM

      • @Hermes

        The third of all doctors who are foreign born includes many who got their degrees in the United States, in any case it’s not terribly relevant. Despite foreign competition doctors are still a high-paying, high-status job, so why aren’t more American men becoming doctors? The only things that can account for the decline are:

        1. The pool of men who could potentially be doctors has declined due to some unexplained fall in capability within that pool.

        2. The men in that pool are equally capable, but are now turning away from a high-paying, high-status job in search of greener pastures elsewhere.

        3. Insiders are colluding to restrict supply.

        Alexander Turok

        October 22, 2019 at 7:48 PM

      • Alexander Turok, that’s not correct. International students in US medical schools are extremely rare. I’m unable to find good data, but I graduated from medical school in 2011 and can count on one hand the number of my classmates who were foreign-born. Medical school admission is highly competitive and fewer than 40% of applicants are ever accepted anywhere. The reason more Americans aren’t becoming doctors isn’t that they don’t want to, it’s that there aren’t more seats in US medical schools. I suppose you would classify that as “insiders colluding to restrict supply” because the American Association of Medical Colleges (AAMC) has declined to open more medical schools. But assuming the AAMC is doing this in order to prop up the value of doctors by keeping supply low and demand high, other institutions like the ACGME (which accredits residencies) and the US government (which issues visas to foreign doctors) are doing an end-run around them by just importing more doctors. But the point is that Caplan is wrong because he thinks the supply of doctors as a percentage of the population has declined, when it has not. It’s just that the increase has come from immigration and not US medical grads. Presumably Caplan, being a libertarian, wouldn’t think there was anything wrong with that.

        Hermes

        October 24, 2019 at 6:11 PM

      • “But the point is that Caplan is wrong because he thinks the supply of doctors as a percentage of the population has declined, when it has not.”

        Maybe, but that doesn’t invalidate his point. If “other institutions like the ACGME (which accredits residencies) and the US government (which issues visas to foreign doctors) are doing an end-run around them by just importing more doctors,” it isn’t enough to reduce the wages of doctors to the point where American men no longer find it attractive to go into. I’m very far from Caplan’s position on immigration, but that doesn’t justify straw-manning him, his libertarian views would have him condemn any form of governmental supply-restriction, even one which benefits immigrants. He’s a different breed from your typical anti-white Leftist. The “migra” test is only supposed to be applied to cases where the cause is immigration. The cause is the supply restrictions, if the government restricted the amount of food farmers could produce but allowed foreign food to be imported, would you blame foreign farmers? No, you blame your government.

        Alexander Turok

        October 26, 2019 at 1:04 PM

  13. Not sure I agree with this black pill. I know there are suburbanites who didn’t vote or voted for Clinton because they thought Trump would be a disaster. The last 3 years have proven the sky won’t fall if Trump is elected, so that card can’t be played again.
    Trump’s path to victory is a continued strong economy (doubtful) and a wackadoo D nominee.

    DN Poolside

    October 21, 2019 at 11:56 AM

    • Why is a continued strong economy doubtful?

      Lowe

      October 21, 2019 at 12:29 PM

      • He does not know what is talking about. The economy was weakened because the Fed has inverted the yield curve, causing credit markets to fail to clear. This is how Trump’s tax cuts have been short-circuited. Still, we have rising employment and wages and this is important to keeping the economy on track.

        map

        October 21, 2019 at 6:17 PM

      • The economy has been going strong for a while now. I am skeptical when people claim that a downturn is right around the corner. Why? Because we’re due? That’s not a reason. I want to hear a real reason.

        As far interest rates go, the Fed is supposed to raise rates when things have gone well for some time. They are doing their job when they do that. If anything it is worrisome that Trump pressures them to lower rates, or not raise them as much as they wish to.

        Lowe

        October 22, 2019 at 10:28 AM

    • I agree with this analysis. I voted for Hillary in 2016 (hated having to do it, though) largely because I thought Trump would try to make the Republican party socially liberal. I can see that I was wrong. So I’ll be voting for Trump this time. But the Democrats are getting crazier by the day. I heard that recently Beto advocated removing tax exemption from churches that don’t recognize gay marriage. The Democrats are apparently returning to their 1960’s and 1970’s policy of betting on young liberal voters replacing older conservative voters. But the culture never shifts as quickly as they think its shifting, and in the end it results in a net loss partly because young people vote at a lower rate than their elders, and partly because the Dems move so far to the left so quickly that even most young people think they’re too extreme.

      Maryk (the g-loaded guidette)

      October 21, 2019 at 1:46 PM

      • It’s common for the primaries to bring out the crazy and then after they get nominated, both nominees track to the center.

        I never understood this. Do people not listen to what the candidates say during the primary season? And the Dems really have gone off the deep end.

        gothamette

        October 21, 2019 at 8:52 PM

  14. I’ve been hoping this whole time that the corruption behind the Russian dossier and the use of Government Spy agencies to spy on a political opponent using manufactured evidence has been the ace up Trump’s sleeve that he will expose before just before the election. Kind of like how the “grab ’em by the pussy” tape was used against him just before the election. But as time goes on that hope gets slimmer.

    chris

    October 21, 2019 at 12:00 PM

    • Seems really unlikely but one can hope. I suspect even if there were a pact signed in blood (and confirmed by DNA testing) concerning the co-conspirators of the coup that the media would simply ignore it.

      We need a free press & free speech in this country, and sitting idly by while Google, Facebook, etc censor the hell out of his supporters will not be kind to Trump.

      Panther of the Blogocube

      October 21, 2019 at 5:23 PM

  15. Just came back from a trip to the Hudson Valley. I also had the opportunity to visit Bear Mountain, which is a prole getaway in the region. Unsurprisingly, there were swarms of Eastern Parasitics from Asia, some of them even firing up the grill by the Hessian Lake.

    The wealthy and educated classes tend to avoid this region of the valley, and I came back to the city using the Circle Line on the Hudson, which was carrying boat load of proles and a few ghetto NAMs, who were much worse than the Eastern Asiatics, in behavior roaming around the sticks and shrubs, instead these miscreants were making a rowdy scene on a floater.

    Methinks that a subgroup of upper classes of Whites will not be voting and understand that America is pretty much f#cked in terms of demography.

    Ok, what, who's this again?

    October 21, 2019 at 12:06 PM

    • “were swarms of Eastern Parasitics from Asia”

      Too bad Lion attracts such bigoted commenters. I don’t think Asian Americans work at lower rates than other Americans.

      Beliavsky

      October 21, 2019 at 12:50 PM

      • He’s just mad because they didn’t like his Victorian gentleman’s costume.

        Lowe

        October 21, 2019 at 1:23 PM

      • And his gaiters.

        gothamette

        October 22, 2019 at 11:53 AM

      • A parasite is “an organism that lives in or on an organism (its host) and benefits by deriving nutrients at the other’s expense.” This could mean someone sponging off welfare but not necessarily. People frequently excuse immigration by saying “they just came for a better life.” Who cares? A tick that crawls up one’s pant leg and attaches itself to their taint is just their for a better life, too. Immigrants similarly migrate for their own benefit then harm their host by driving down salaries while driving up costs (i.e. housing, etc).

        But one need not be on welfare or an immigrant to be parasitic. Many non-immigrant demographics also fit the definition of parasite because they put their own individual and/or group interests above those of the general population. Some even seek to undermine the host population. Which is why you got bent out of shape over JS saying it. Not that you care about Asians but because you use them as a tool to defend your own parasitic tendencies. It’s not the first time you’ve done it, either.

        destructure

        October 24, 2019 at 2:54 PM

      • I agree that JS needs to cut out those comments. Even though I’m totally opposed to immigration from South Asia and from China (some of whom could be a fifth column).

        I’m totally cool with immigration from Japan and Korea.

        Lion of the Blogosphere

        October 24, 2019 at 3:00 PM

      • There’s an immigrant on your blog who has repeatedly said how glad he is that Americans die from drug overdose and killed in foreign wars. He recently said he intends to vote for Trump not because it’s good for America but because it’s good for the country he emigrated from. That’s not American. It’s anti-American and he’s far from the only one. Americans should not have to put up with that that parasitic crap.

        destructure

        October 24, 2019 at 5:34 PM

    • Whenever I went to Bear Mountain, I noticed the numerous blacks would stick strictly to the picnic areas and would not venture even 10 feet into the woods. The numerous whites would make a beeline for the woods where they hiked, or go to the zoo or the big lodge or the tower at the top of the mountain. It worked out well. The twain would never meet and everyone had a good time. Never saw any Asians.

      Heritage Armeriacan

      October 21, 2019 at 8:52 PM

      • The Asians are pretty much like the blacks where they only congregate in the picnic area and consume food in and out the Bear Mountain Inn. It’s the Whites who are found all over the different parts of the park. Nevertheless, it’s prole to venture into Bear Mountain, unless you are there to survey the points of interest from an intellectual viewpoint with a tour guide or by yourself. In fact, most getaways advertised are suited for proles. The same low brow tourists who bring their family into Disneyland will venture into Bear Mountain to have a good time while feasting and their kids running afoul, with those without a family being stoned. Essentially, this is what proles like to do when they are on a trip.

        Ok, what, who's this again?

        October 21, 2019 at 10:46 PM

  16. Lion, that’s interesting, and you make some good points. I think you are leaving some things out though.

    1. Money. Hillary outspent Trump by 3-1. Trump will have more money than the democrats this time. Liz Warren or Bernie will have Wall Street stampede to the republicans, despite hating Trump, just out of self-preservation. You would think Biden should have good fundraising, but he sure doesn’t now. He’s senile. And clearly dirty. No one wants to give him money.

    2. College-educated suburban whites have been trending away from the Republicans, it’s true. What would it take to stop that? How about taking away their private health insurance and telling them they have to have medicare? How about a massive tax increase? How about banning fracking, ie crippling the US economy and sending gas prices skyrocketing? Warren is already committed to all of that and she is going to be the nominee (I think). If she is, Bloomberg will get in as an independent. I was in Washington last week for some meetings, and all the people I talked to – professional democrat operatives who hate Trump with a passion — were terrified that the primary is making any democrat unelectable. They were especially enraged at Beto, but Warren too. Trump can run about 20 different commercials with all that money that are nothing but clips of democrats committing to things that 80% of the public opposes. Mike Bennett could duck that attack, none of the others can.

    3. You don’t mention it, but you seem to think Trump’s share of the minority vote won’t change from ’16. I think you’re mistaken. Trump’s approval among black men is something like 35%, unheard of for a Republican. Minorities are doing extremely well from Trump cutting back on immigration, their incomes are up like they have never experienced before. And Warren promising to give illegals free health care is poison to NAM American citizens. Trump will keep Michigan because of that, and I’m guessing he takes Minnesota the same way. Minorities didn’t turn out for Hillary. You think they will for Warren? For Bernie? Pete Buttigieg? Nope.

    4. Related to this, all the economic prediction models say Trump should win. They can be wrong (they were last time) but most of the time they are right. Not comforting that you’re betting against all of them.

    5. Trump is the best campaigner we’ve seen in my lifetime. He destroyed the Bushes, took over the republican party, ran Paul Ryan out of town and destroyed the house of Clinton because of his skill at defining contrast issues and personal attacks. None of the top democrats are remotely in his league on that, the true dirty business of politics. Trump has been attacked 24/7 for 3 years, you’re right about that. And it has hurt him. But it’s also true there’s nothing they can throw at him they haven’t already used and failed with. Independents have tuned the media out. More important, he has barely started attacking back. When he does it, I think it’ll be brutal. He took the most powerful person in America and when he was done with Hillary she was a mentally ill alcoholic babbling about Tulsi and the Russians (she was close to that on the booze already, but still). What do you think he’s going to do to Biden? To Warren? Bernie? He will gut any of them like a fish.

    One of your commenters said people like me should bet on Trump. I have. I thought it was a steal. Maybe I’m wrong, we’ll find out a year from now.

    But, I think you left out the biggest threat to Trump. That guy could drop dead any second. His lifestyle is crazy unhealthy.

    Sternhammer

    October 21, 2019 at 12:24 PM

    • Current polls already reflect most of this, and they show Trump losing badly.

      Lion of the Blogosphere

      October 21, 2019 at 12:40 PM

      • Read the internals on the polls. Most polls I’ve read lately start with a share of about 40% democrats. The actual number is 31% (vs 29% republicans) — per Gallup polling for party preference. Partly that’s cause democrats are cheaper to find, and partly that’s because the people running the poll companies are white professional class people i.e. democrats, and that’s what they want you to believe.

        That’s if you can find the internals. Pollsters still publish sex and race demographics, but a lot lately have taken to hiding party preference. I assume cause they are obviously nonsense.

        The other thing most polls do is not control seriously for voter likelihood. Polls of people who voted last time are far more Trumpist than polls of Americans or even registered voters.

        And no, the polls don’t reflect the positions the dems have taken in the primary. Only dedicated followers of politics like you know what happened in the debates. Independent low information voters don’t listen to debates. They get their info from TV commercials in the last month before the election.

        Sternhammer

        October 21, 2019 at 12:59 PM

    • It’s tempting to assume that people who have health insurance through their jobs won’t want it taken away by Warren’s Medicare for All plan and certainly won’t want to pay higher taxes. I’m not so sure that’s a safe assumption. Employer-provided health insurance is seldom free for the employees, they normally have to pay substantial shares, not to mention that the now-unnecessary employer shares would at be at least theoretically passed on in the form of higher pay. Finally, the idea of having your health insurance tied into your job can be worrisome.

      Peter

      ironrailsironweights

      October 21, 2019 at 1:06 PM

      • No, that’s not how it works. Employers do not raise your pay if you opt-out of getting health insurance. This is the lie of the “total compensation package.”

        Imagine two people work for a company. Each gets a separate healthcare package. Now, imagine they get married. Either one can drop their health care package and opt for the spouse’s package.

        Does the company compensate the spouse who drops their package with a higher salary? No, they do not.

        Therefore, no one is going to want to go on medicare and lose their employer-provided healthcare.

        map

        October 21, 2019 at 6:28 PM

      • “No, that’s not how it works. Employers do not raise your pay if you opt-out of getting health insurance. This is the lie of the “total compensation package.””

        If private health insurance goes away completely through the introduction of Medicare for All it will be a different story.

        Peter

        ironrailsironweights

        October 21, 2019 at 9:11 PM

      • ironrailsironweights,

        No, companies are not going to give you a higher salary when they spot providing health insurance. They will just pocket the savings. Meanwhile, you will get taxed more on your unchanging income and will have to deal with crappy Obamacare-style medical care.

        map

        October 22, 2019 at 2:16 AM

    • Some good points there, but I would point out that everyone likes Medicare. That’s why “Medicare for all” has been gaining traction; it was a hugely successful and shrewd rhetorical move by the left to start using the phrase “Medicare-for-all” instead of “single-payer universal healthcare” (though Sanders is still going around saying that health care is a “fundamental human right.”) Try finding anyone, even a self-identified conservative Republican, on Medicare who doesn’t like it. Sure, a few pre-retirement-age Libertarians may say they don’t like Medicare, but watch their revealed preferences when they turn 65.

      Hermes

      October 21, 2019 at 3:38 PM

      • “…“Medicare-for-all” … Sure, a few pre-retirement-age Libertarians may say they don’t like Medicare…”

        The term Medicare-for-all, as was Green Gew Deal, was developed by Libertarians in the 1970’s to describe their non-tax funded social program objectives. Except, unlike Medicare, they would include dental.

        I’m not surprised Bernie is using it, as he has been very friendly with libertarian activists over the years…

        Robert

        October 21, 2019 at 5:03 PM

      • LOL at the idea that a government-funded single-payer universal health care scheme is libertarian. Are you the guy who was trying to claim that Gene Roddenberry was a libertarian? What’s with this effort to baptize non-libertarian things as libertarian?

        Hermes

        October 21, 2019 at 11:03 PM

  17. Hillary Clinton didnt campaign there because her staff thought it would actually her with rhe voters. She had an amazing lack of charisma for a presidential candidate.

    Alex

    October 21, 2019 at 12:31 PM

    • And still she won the popular vote. All the Democrats need is a candidate whose campaign manager understands the rules of the game. This was all too petty for HRC to pay attention to.

      Lion is simply right that the Democrats have a built-in demographic advantage, which will only get stronger. Whether they will prevail in 2020, I dunno, but they do have this advantage. Eventually the rotting pier will fall.

      gothamette

      October 21, 2019 at 8:58 PM

      • Yeah…the popular vote…with all of those illegals in California voting. That is the example. I am sure we are on track for another spike of Acute Flaccid Myelitis that shows up every election season when Central American Enterovirus rears its ugly head.

        map

        October 22, 2019 at 2:21 AM

      • The illegals in CA voting has been debunked.

        Of course, I think ALL votes from CA are illegal by definition. But the way you mean it, no.

        gothamette

        October 22, 2019 at 11:34 AM

      • 1.4 million ineligible voters were just removed from the California voter rolls. This was “debunked” the way pizzagate was debunked.

        map

        October 22, 2019 at 4:57 PM

  18. A strong economy is normally a winner, but Trump himself is maniacal and exhausting. “All the Dems have to do is not be crazy.” Well, you can say the same thing about Don, but he seems incapable of that. Even if you think impeachment by the House is bogus and purely partisan, it’ll be a black mark against him. The whole point is not to force him from office but damage his re-election prospects. If Warren gets the nod, however, blacks might stay home again. And a southern border wall is more popular with Hispanics than you think (less competition from other beaners).

    Brendan

    October 21, 2019 at 12:41 PM

  19. RCP avg margin for Clinton in polls through end of 10/2015 was Clinton +7.45 while current RCP avg margin for Warren is +5.2. Agree that Trump faces huge obstacles but he also has a number of advantages. Trump’s approval is what is and is unlikely to move much (it’s not all that different from Obama at this point in 2011). Voters know little about Dem candidates aside from fawning press coverage so their approval rating are all as high as they will get and will fall once they are nominee. For various reasons beyond the scope of a blog comment, I rate Trump slight favorite at present.

    gazza90

    October 21, 2019 at 12:42 PM

  20. The WSJ was reporting today on the impact to various energy stocks because Warren has said she will terminate all drilling leases on federal land and ban fracking nationwide. I agree that Trump is a very weak candidate, but I cannot see how a candidate who talks like this can win. The journal gave an estimate that natural gas prices would go from $2.32 to between $9-$15. Oil would rise to around $80-$85. Surely some people will figure out what this will do for driving and home heating. Maybe apartment dwellers in NYC don’t notice energy prices, but suburbanites do. I think if the Democrats nominated someone like Bloomberg or even Clinton, Trump would lose in a landslide, but Warren gives Trump a chance. Also, Pennsylvania is one of the swing states, and the people there would be crazy to vote for Warren considering that it is a major energy producer.

    Stilicho

    October 21, 2019 at 12:54 PM

    • Swing voters don’t pay attention to policy details. The fakestream medial will tell them that Warren is the sane choice and breathlessly praise her. Swing voters don’t watch Fox News or read Breitbart.

      Lion of the Blogosphere

      October 21, 2019 at 1:08 PM

      • Dude, political ads won’t run exclusively on Fox News and Breitbart.

        Lowe

        October 21, 2019 at 1:20 PM

      • True. Those swing voters will get a heavy dose of ads painting Warren as an incorrigible liar about her race, pregnancy, etc. She’s basically Hillary 2.0, only more homely looking.

        Brendan

        October 21, 2019 at 1:58 PM

    • MEH 0910

      October 21, 2019 at 2:40 PM

      • Deperate HBD denialism there, willing to wreck education for middle-class whites to force integration, which will never work because the test-score gap is GENETIC.

        But since the fakestream media has everyone brainwashed about that, I don’t expect anyone who voted for Hillary to NOT vote for Warren because of that.

        It’s not like anyone is going to read the whitepaper, and if they do they can convince themselves it’s a lot of BS that Congress will never pass.

        On the other hand, it’s correct for schools not to focus in increasing test scores, because test scores are genetic so they can only be increased with eugenics.

        Lion of the Blogosphere

        October 21, 2019 at 2:45 PM

      • From another blog:

        “When you wonder where all the children have gone, they patiently explain to you that it is now too expensive to have children, even with both mommy and daddy working full-time, unless mommy is a single mother, in which case the government pays her based on how many children she has with random men who aren’t allowed to live with her (and spend most of their time in jail in any case).”

        With the test-score gap being GENETIC, imagine what it will be in the future.

        MoreSigmasThanYou

        October 21, 2019 at 4:54 PM

      • Just looking at the general demographics in America, there’s a dysgenic trend when it comes to middle class and lower Whites, with an increasing NAM and Eastern Asiatic population. This doesn’t bode well and we’re heading towards a de-society.

        Unless we’re talking about a technological world where humans are being retrofitted with artificial intelligent circuits as the only saving grace to this.

        Ok, what, who's this again?

        October 21, 2019 at 10:10 PM

  21. This is nothing more than “demographics doom Republicans” topped with a scoop of “moron-Americans believe the liberal news media.”

    Every election, defeatists trot out this combination. Yet Republicans win as often as not.

    Justice Duvall

    October 21, 2019 at 1:22 PM

    • Reagan won every state except Minnesota. That will never happen today. Trump will be lucky to eke out a small victory in the Electoral College, but the Democrat has the potential to dominate the way Reagan did.

      Lion of the Blogosphere

      October 21, 2019 at 1:35 PM

      • Lion is correct here. Though I don’t think a Democrat is likely to win 49 states anytime soon (there are too many states that lean 20+ points Republican), I do expect to see a Democrat win the popular vote by 15+ points before much longer.

        In my case, the first election I can remember distinctly was ’92. There have been 7 elections starting then; the Republicans have won the electoral college 3 times — “often as not” checks out — but they’ve only won the popular vote once. And they won by 2 points — the same margin as Hillary won in 2016!

        So the Republicans in the best year of my memory did about as well as the Democrats in a pretty bad year for them. It’s just that the Republicans happened to win the White House both of those times due to being structurally favored by the EC.

        These EC wins are unsustainable. There hadn’t been one for over a century before 2000, and sooner or later they will become very rare again, or the EC will be disbanded.

        Wency

        October 21, 2019 at 6:40 PM

  22. It’s ridiculous to say anything with certainty this far out. Currently, the Democrat is a slight favorite. An unnamed opponent always does well in polls against a known incumbent. Once you put a name on the challenger, things even up. During the campaign, I’d expect Trump to consistently poll behind, but he’ll pull ahead, if only for a moment, at some point during the horse race (due to a scandal, or whatever).

    Vince

    October 21, 2019 at 2:29 PM

  23. It’s all going to be about prole white turnout. I agree with you that Trump voters are dying out and new, anti-Trump voters continue to flood into the nation or reach voting age. But there are still huge numbers of whites that don’t vote. A lot of them would vote for Trump if they showed up. But they won’t, not enough of them.

    At the same time, the media has whipped up so much Trump hatred that white Liberals will be voting in record numbers and Twitter will crash from all of them posting virtue signalling pics of their “I Voted!” stickers.

    As a finger in the wind exercise, take any random Trump tweet and spend 15 minutes reading the replies to it. They run about 10 to 1 against, and the level of fury (and off-the-wall insanity) of the anti-Trump people is astonishing to see.

    Bottom line: I think it will be close in electoral votes but Trump will lose due to demographic shifts that he can’t overcome. America ends officially some time in 2021. It’s been over for decades already, but in 2021 it will become obvious to everyone.

    peterike

    October 21, 2019 at 2:34 PM

    • Thanks to baby boomers being afraid of dying, living well past your 80’s means the people are not dying fast enough to make a difference.

      Demographic arguments are overblown. Look at the original demographic argument: Democrats vs. Republicans. If Democrats were the party of the working man and middle class and Republicans were the party of the rich, then how did Republicans ever win enough elections to ever challenge Democrats? There will always be more “working men” then “rich people” so the Repubs should have disappeared decades ago. Yet, they did not.

      Demographic arguments are the same problem. The young and the old exist within families and vote based on maximizing value for their families as a group, not just the “youth” group or the “elderly” group. Families have transcending demographics that will counter a trend quite easily. This is especially true in suburban areas, where there could be mixes of Trump and non-Trump supporters within a family that cancel out the vote, which is why the decisive demographic was prole whites in places like Michigan and Pennsylvania.

      map

      October 21, 2019 at 7:19 PM

  24. You can call in Medicare or anything. It will be worse and more expensive than what you have now. All changes that happened during the last 30 years produced the system that was worse and more expensive than before, despite all technological, medical, pharmaceutical etc. progress. Maybe there was no progress, maybe it is purely imaginary.

    My 2¢

    October 21, 2019 at 4:36 PM

    • “You can call in Medicare or anything. It will be worse and more expensive than what you have now”

      I doubt that. My parents have Medicare and it’s much better than what I have now and much less expensive.

      Lion of the Blogosphere

      October 21, 2019 at 4:53 PM

      • And your parents will vote for Trump because they do not want to see their medicare resources going to illegal aliens with who they will have to compete.

        Medicare for the entire planet is a dead end.

        map

        October 21, 2019 at 6:34 PM

      • My parents will not vote for Trump because they have been brainwashed to hate him by the fakestream media.

        But there are many other prole Jews who love Trump and will voter for him again, who live in Guido parts of the tri-state area. One such person I know died a few months ago.

        Lion of the Blogosphere

        October 21, 2019 at 7:08 PM

      • It’s unlikely you’d ever get medicare at medicare rates. In Washington they had to set it at 160% of medicare rates:

        https://marginalrevolution.com/marginalrevolution/2019/07/the-health-care-public-option-in-washington-state.html

        Doctors and hospitals don’t want going to give up their cash cow and I doubt the Democrats will make them do so. For all their egalitarian rhetoric, doctors and still high-status experts and Democrats won’t want to be seen as opposing high-status experts. I don’t expect much of a difference in cost of medicare for all versus our current system. Our current system is already so far from a free-market that “well the free market is obviously better wut you want collective farms or something” doesn’t apply.

        Alexander Turok

        October 21, 2019 at 6:57 PM

      • “Guido parts of the tri-state area”

        Anyplace where proles speak in a NY drawl is most likely these “guido” parts.

        Outside of Staten Island, a good example is the large swathe of area minus the Asiatic Chin neighborhoods in Belt Parkway Brooklyn is Trump country. Neighborhoods with tacky names like Sheepshead Bay, Graves-end and Midwood, and the dirty beaches where Russians populate all voted for Trump in large numbers.

        Ok, what, who's this again?

        October 21, 2019 at 9:25 PM

  25. I haven’t followed the elections closely, but are the democrats and republicans pretty similar in attitudes towards China now? Or are the democrats clearly more pro-China?

    I’m a PhD student now and the common rhetoric actually seems to obliquely pro-Trump, at least in the sense that it’s virulently anti-China.

    alex2

    October 21, 2019 at 5:45 PM

    • Wait, I thought that PhD students by definition are Chinese.

      Alice

      October 22, 2019 at 2:40 PM

  26. Lion,

    Pay attention to this:

    https://theintercept.com/2019/06/18/eliot-engel-primary-challenge/

    “Hawkish” means Jewish.

    The Engel bid is a reboot of AOC and the Queens Boro President election.

    This is the twilight of Jewish power in NYC.

    gothamette

    October 21, 2019 at 6:22 PM

  27. The most recent Fox News poll shows that Trump loses by 10% to either Biden or Warren, and by 9% to Sanders.

    It’s hard to see Trump losing to either Biden or Warren at this point. Biden is vulnerable to corruption attack ads and Warren is vulnerable to ads mocking her history of constantly lying about your background. Bernie would be a strong general election candidate against Trump because he has an authenticity the other Dem candidates (save Tulsi) don’t have, but it’s hard to see him winning the nomination.

    The Trump campaign can also run ads against the Dems in general using their LGBTQ town halls. How well will the trans nonsense play in the Upper Midwest?

    David Pinsen

    October 21, 2019 at 6:37 PM

    • People don’t much like that stuff but they also don’t like strong opposition to it because they associate it with bible thumpers. Perhaps more importantly, no one wants to ruin their career by working on a “homophobic” campaign video.

      Alexander Turok

      October 21, 2019 at 7:33 PM

      • “No one wants to ruin their career by working on a “homophobic” campaign video.”

        Tell that to the guys who made the Willie Horton ad and rode that baby all the way to the bank.

        You think conceiving and directing effective ads is a career killer? Think again.

        Curle

        October 21, 2019 at 10:04 PM

    • “It’s hard to see Trump losing to either Biden or Warren at this point. Biden is vulnerable to corruption attack ads and Warren is vulnerable to ads mocking her history of constantly lying about your background. Bernie would be a strong general election candidate against Trump because he has an authenticity the other Dem candidates (save Tulsi) don’t have, but it’s hard to see him winning the nomination.”

      Biden’s campaign is dead.

      Trump would stomp Bernie. There is oppo research on what a bizarre guy this was from age 40 to 60. Wrote porn. Visited Russia when it was Stalinist. More. He would not win.

      I still say Warren is a formidable candidate. Most people do NOT care about Fauxcohontas. They just don’t. They are willing to accept she had a bitty bit of Indian blood and used it to get ahead. A lot of white folx from the mid-West have, or imagine they have, Indian blood. This is a non-starter.

      The trans stuff means something to you, me and Rod Dreher, but it has to be handled carefully. I would buy ads showing Drag Queen Story Hour in all markets, but that just shows that I shouldn’t be handling campaigns. It makes nice white people nervous. They just don’t want to talk about it. Of course this attitude paves the way for DQSH to be shoved down their throats in the schools, but I am talking about politics as the art of the possible, not what should be.

      The only barrier to a Warren Presidency is the black vote, and I think they’ll get over it.

      gothamette

      October 21, 2019 at 9:06 PM

  28. The only reason Trump has a chance because the Democrats are tripping over themselves posturing towards insanity.

    Trump is doing *something* on immigration which is nice, but everything else has been a shitshow.

    I don’t think Republicans realize how bad healthcare has gotten for even upper middle class people. This issue may cost them the election if Democrats can keep the crazy from everything else down.

    It’s bad enough we have to deal with absurd insurance premiums and deductibles. But going to the doctor itself has become a chore because get hit with phantom bills for a year after you go to a doc for whatever random billing bullshit that comes out.

    I’m an extremely healthy 28 yr old male so I have zero issues on my employers low deductible plan. But seeing friends starting families, people a little bit less lucky than me, parents, etc.. dealing with navigating the healthcare system, holy shit what a hell hole.

    After Republican’s deafening silence on healthcare for 4 years, can people really keep voting for them?

    Kaz

    October 21, 2019 at 6:58 PM

    • “I’m an extremely healthy 28 yr old male so I have zero issues on my employers low deductible plan. But seeing friends starting families, people a little bit less lucky than me, parents, etc.. dealing with navigating the healthcare system, holy shit what a hell hole.”

      Yes, correct.

      Lion of the Blogosphere

      October 21, 2019 at 7:12 PM

    • You mean, you are dealing with all of the problems caused by Obamacare. Rather than creating an affordable healthcare system, Obamacare made it worse…exactly what Democrats intended.

      I myself had a terrible issue with Obamacare…a billing dispute over an ER visit. It took seven months to resolve, and not before I had four collection agencies hounding me, Yeah, I’m a smart guy who can navigate bureaucracy, but it would be hell on other people.

      Even Trump understands this. That is why he wanted a repeal and a replacement of ObamaCare with a better system

      map

      October 22, 2019 at 2:27 AM

    • I will vote Dem this year, and vote for the most leftist Dem on my primary ticket…in the hope that we will get single payer…I doubt we get it…most likely if the dems win the congress and white house, they will just reinstate obamacare so that the insurance companies and tax return industries are assured of profits…

      also, I am voting Dem to punish trump and the gop congress

      rapping boomer

      October 22, 2019 at 7:15 AM

      • You are very stupid.

        The Dems gave you ObamaCare and raised all of your costs across the board. Now you want to reward them for that?

        Dems don’t want to give you healthcare. They hate you. They just want your money.

        map

        October 22, 2019 at 5:01 PM

  29. Trump will win in a landslide.

    It is not possible for the media to be so obviously compromised without the polling companies being obviously compromised as well.

    Look at Drudge and Fox News. These are being treated as bellwether events, but it is easy to see what happened: Fox had the majority of its assets bought out by Disney for a huge premium. Rupert Murdoch now only owns Fox News. In exchange for Disney spending $50 billion to acquire “Pose” and “Deadpool,” Murdoch and Lefty Lachlan agreed to unleash such luminaries as Chris Wallace and Donna Brazile and Shep Smith and Neil Cavuto and Napolitano. Drudge changed out his advertising company in exchange for helping out his dad in some business venture. Now Drudge is just a wall-to-wall fake news links. Combine both, and it is easy to see that the polls are filled with a minimum 48% Democrat samples that will always tilt unfavorability ratings against Trump.

    This is why Trump always runs rallies. Each rally fills a stadium and leads to massive overflow, with at least 30,000 people showing up and often waiting for hours just to be let in. These rallies contradict the polls.

    Trump, basically, owns the entire battlespace and the strategy he is executing will come about once the Democrat candidate wins the primary.

    It will probably be Warren. This means a DOJ investigation of Joe Biden and Hunter Biden will start, which is going to be a huge rear-guard action against Democrat resources. You will see declassification of the 2016 election docs come out. Trump will then own the Fed, which will uninvert the yield curve and finally lead to better economic growth. This is in addition to any frontal assaults on Warren herself.

    Trump is currently pocketing any wildcards to see how the Democrat primaries shakeout before going for the kill. Timing is everything.

    map

    October 21, 2019 at 7:00 PM

    • Oh…and you buy tickets to a Trump rally.

      map

      October 21, 2019 at 7:05 PM

  30. Most presidents have tried to broaden their appeal in their first term to reach out to more independents who did not vote for them. Trump has not done this. He seems to be trying to get his core base more excited about him rather than trying to broaden his base.

    There is some evidence in polls that Trump is losing support among working class women who are not Evangelicals. Trump’s effort to amp up his appeal to working class men may be hurting him with women.

    There are a lot business Republicans that voted for Trump because they thought Republicans are good for business. Trump has cut taxes and regulation but his trade wars are definitely depressing the economy. You don’t see this effect in consumer spending. You see it in business investments in new equipment and facilities. Right now businesses are uncertain what trade policies will be, so they are holding back and conserving cash. Business Republicans are not happy about the way Trump has handled trade issues and some may not vote for him again.

    MikeCA

    October 21, 2019 at 7:07 PM

    • He’s making an effort to amp up his appeal to working class men? That’s news to me. If you look at the 2018 vs. 2016 exit polls, the GOP lost votes among everybody, urban and rural, low income and high income, ect.

      Alexander Turok

      October 21, 2019 at 7:29 PM

      • This is interesting. Where’d you read that?

        gothamette

        October 21, 2019 at 9:08 PM

      • At least in modern times there is always a major swing in congressional elections but Trump and the GOP lost less in 2018 than most presidents before them despite everything stacked against them so again I have to ask if this is the first time you’ve seriously followed politics?

        redarmyvodka

        October 21, 2019 at 9:12 PM

    • The trade war is doing no such thing. The bigger effect is the Fed. The Fed has raised the federal funds rate by 1000% since Trump took office, in an effort to crash the economy on his watch. Trump railing against the Fed is preventing that scenario from happening.

      The rest is just conventional, and wrong, thinking.

      map

      October 21, 2019 at 7:46 PM

    • Please clap.

      Lowe

      October 21, 2019 at 8:14 PM

  31. Explain something to me. All this discussion about Trump’s chances and no mention whatever of vote fraud? Not even a factor? Even when everyone agrees the Dems put no effort into those 3 states last time?

    Marty

    October 21, 2019 at 7:37 PM

    • Massive voter fraud is real and is probably Trump’s greatest challenge. Trump should have won in Iowa during the GOP primaries in 2015. They tried more voter fraud against him but elections can only be stolen when they’re close. Trump would have won the popular vote and at least five more states in 2016 as well like Colorado, Virginia, New Mexico, Arizona, and likely his home state of New York. Sadly both Republicans and Democrats fought his presidential commission on voter fraud.

      redarmyvodka

      October 21, 2019 at 8:49 PM

      • Believing Iowan Republicans were stuffing ballots to sabotage Trump is like believing Swedes are capable of anything shown in “The Girl with the Dragon Tattoo.”

        Lowe

        October 21, 2019 at 10:10 PM

      • It should be obvious by now both parties rig their presidential primaries.

        Since Iowa & New Hampshire come first they’d be ideal places to start.

        The 2000 presidential election was stolen outright why not rig a primary?

        The Iowa GOP establishment likely gets big bribes for their efforts too.

        redarmyvodka

        October 22, 2019 at 3:14 AM

      • When Iowa and New Hampshire are majority Hispanic, then we can talk about your Republican ballot stuffing conspiracy.

        Lowe

        October 22, 2019 at 12:31 PM

  32. Trudeau won.

    Canadians: how many more years of this?

    Think he’ll do redface?

    gothamette

    October 21, 2019 at 10:34 PM

    • Trudeau won, but with a minority. Needs a coalition government to survive.

      Parliamentary democracies are bs. That is why every third world country has a parliament.

      map

      October 22, 2019 at 2:30 AM

      • I want to hear from our resident Canajans how they feel.

        gothamette

        October 22, 2019 at 11:34 AM

  33. Whoever wins, America loses in the long term. Obama and Trump have broken a lot of precedents in the Republic. Trump and Hillary are the beginning of rule by strong people rather than law.

    For example, Hillary has done things in plain sight that would have had her jailed already, but she is considered untouchable. Worse, she had a devoted cult following who would excuse everything in plain sight. Trump is just as obvious given all the MAGA devotees.

    Reading ancient history, I’m struck by the parallels of how the old Roman Republic unraveled and the US today. Even after Trump, Warren and the others exit the stage, there will be new strong leaders and their followers devoted more to them rather than to the state. I in fact think Trump is a latter day Sulla. Which means we are close to seeing a latter day Pompey, Crassus and Caesar soon.

    Red Pill Aspie

    October 21, 2019 at 11:19 PM

  34. Six months from now some serious people with no major history in politics are going to start throwing their hats in the ring and it will snowball into a big surprise. If I were to bet money it would be on an independent wining the presidency outside the D/R party system, not on Warren or Hillary.

    It’s not 1992. The new paradigm is repeatedly vote out career politicians, regardless of party. I bet AOC loses her reelection bid, and a bunch seats get surprise primaried like what happened with AOC and Cantor.

    Nobody on the D stage right now has a chance against Trump. They won’t get any corporate money or free media subterfuge. None of them can drive turnout. The elites are actually concerned about somebody like Warren.

    But an independent run by the right person could surprise and scare the heck out of everyone. People are overwhelmingly sick of the parties.

    bobbybobbob

    October 21, 2019 at 11:29 PM

  35. What about the single issue abortion vote?

    Brazilian

    October 22, 2019 at 4:54 AM

    • Trump will not lose the single-issue abortion vote. No Republican will ever lose that vote.

      Lion of the Blogosphere

      October 22, 2019 at 7:26 AM

      • But what happens when republican avtually deliver and Roe vs Wade gets overturned?

        Brazilian

        October 23, 2019 at 12:25 PM

    • If you don’t follow the abortion issue, you may not realize how much anti abortion voters love Trump. Far far more than they love any other republicans.

      Alice

      October 22, 2019 at 3:07 PM

      • Trump delivered on Supreme Court justices. (Although personally I suspect Kavanaugh isn’t going to be as anti-abortion as they think.)

        And they know that 4 more years of Trump probably means that Trump gets to replace RBG.

        Lion of the Blogosphere

        October 22, 2019 at 3:12 PM

  36. no matter who is in the white house or congress, present trends will continue…and there will be no real single payer or no real wall and no reduction in immigration, nor will abortion be outlawed, and affirmative action and protected status classes will be maintained…

    rapping boomer

    October 22, 2019 at 7:11 AM

  37. There’s no way of telling how the tide will turn. The MSM hates trump and will continue to undermine him relentlessly, but Biden is uninspiring and disappointing. Warren seems to have some gravitas but will rich Dems and swing voters vote for a pro-immigration, pro-amnesty, anti-waller?

    Neil Haversham

    October 22, 2019 at 2:59 PM

    • “will rich Dems and swing voters vote for a pro-immigration, pro-amnesty, anti-waller?”

      Yes because they hate Trump.

      Lion of the Blogosphere

      October 22, 2019 at 3:11 PM

  38. MEH 0910

    October 23, 2019 at 6:20 AM

  39. FYI, John Derbyshire mentioned you (and this post specifically) in his weekly podcast.

    https://vdare.com/radio-derb/harvard-asians-and-quotas-joe-biden-s-chances-and-four-years-for-fighting-back-etc

    Brendan

    October 27, 2019 at 6:31 PM


Comments are closed.

%d bloggers like this: