monitoring Trump and relevant contemporary events

Trump told supporters: “We’ve got to keep our country safe. You look at what’s happening in Germany, you look at what’s happening last night in Sweden.”

“Sweden, who would believe this? Sweden. They took in large numbers. They’re having problems like they never thought possible. You look at what’s happening in Brussels. You look at what’s happening all over the world. Take a look at Nice. Take a look at Paris.”

There were questions about whether Trump had confused Sweden with Sehwan in Pakistan, where a suicide bomber blew himself up among devotees at the Sufi shrine on Friday, killing 80 people.
[...]
After Trump’s remarks in Florida the Swedish news outlet Aftonbladet posted a story about crime that really had occurred in Sweden on Friday. It included “due to harsh weather in northern parts of Sweden the road E10 was closed between Katterjakk and Riksgransen” and “a man died in hospital, after an accident in the workplace earlier that day”.

Jesus. Of the six top stories/articles at the New Yorker today, five are on politics.

****, that's a million dollars a month for Obama's vacations and politicking, eh?

A month! Gimme that much for vacation money and you won't NEVER see my ass round these here parts no more, eh?

I mean, sure, I've had my share of extended vacations, meals and lodging included, courtesy of the State, but they wasn't in no fancy-ass resorts, I can tellya that.

Trump press conference reveals long game. Media still scrambling

In Thursday’s presser he was, at times, bombastic, dynamic, angry, irreverent, funny, disorganized, temperamental, attacking, thoughtful, and committed. What about that is different from the man we’ve seen since he entered the race in June of 2015? Nothing.

Yet when it was over, it left the media scrambling, confused and desperate to find the right headline amidst the hundreds of possible takeaways...And yet, the media still hasn’t figured it out. The reaction and fallout from Thursday’s press conference amongst the press simply affirms the president’s basic and underlying message to the American people: “the media hates me and doesn’t understand you.”

On Thursday, the President took back hold of the reins, re-centered his message and took a small step towards victory in 2020. Strategic. Planned. Effective.

The source of Trump’s remark is unclear, but it came after Fox News aired an interview with film-maker Ami Horowitz, whose latest documentary examines whether high crime rates in areas of Sweden is linked to its previous open-door policy on people fleeing war and persecution.

An unquestioned premise among those who live in American cities with international airports has been, for more than half a century now, that Enlightenment values would in time become conventional wisdom. Some fought for this future to come sooner. Others waited patiently. But nobody seemed to believe that it would never arrive. Nobody, certainly, in Los Angeles or the Bay Area (...)

Two decades into the new millennium, however, a plurality of the population has clung defiantly to the old way of life. They still believe in the viability of armed revolt. (...) their solidarity is only reinforced by outside disapproval, particularly disapproval by the northern press. They have resisted with mockery, then rage, the collapse of the old identity categories. They have resisted the premise that white skin should not be given special consideration. They have resisted new technology and scientific evidence of global ecological collapse. The force of this resistance has been strong enough to elect a president.

Our appetite for fresh, piping hot news stories

From a review of Joan Didion's South and West

In the United States today, we have more than our share of the nattering nabobs of negativism. They have formed their own 4H Club the hopeless, hysterical hypochondriacs of history.

===

A spirit of national masochism prevails, encouraged by an effete corps of impudent snobs who characterize themselves as intellectuals

======

Ultraliberalism today translates into a whimpering isolationism in foreign policy, a mulish obstructionism in domestic policy, and a pusillanimous pussyfooting on the critical issue of law and order.

Not just me, of course. It was the broad consensus. Wrong as we know.

We all knew Clinton has vulnerabilities (who doesn't, particularly if female) but almost everyone got the degree wrong.

As to "more likely to lose than Sanders", that's a claim or assumption which I see no reason to grant credence.

But you've not given answers for either 1) or 2) that would demonstrate some unique prescience on the part of anyone re election result other than Moore.

I haven't read Piketty (nor other economists, it's an area of study I've chosen to forgo). Perhaps you could make some case as to how Piketty clarifies the subject at hand (the election result or specifically why Clinton was, in his theory set, a predictably losing candidate

I cite that essay and Mayer's work [...] These are now deep structural factors at federal and state level.

Had Clinton's people properly understood that particular vulnerability and managed to organize in a manner superior to what the opposition was smartly doing, she wouldn't have lost in this ridiculously odd and peripheral way.

Sanders' supporters were passionate [...] Heart is important, passion is important and good intentions are important and an ethical rejection of the role of money in elections is important. But they are deeply insufficient now.

Thanks, eh, John? Mighty black of you. After I slip on my ski mask and bust into the 7-11 tonight with my sawed-off, I'll give that $100 I promised you for writing that, OK? Well, either that, or maybe next Thursday, ya know?

I'm kinda surprised you aint been banned for that post. Probably at least 50 complaints have been filed.

Poor Blathy...he aint never gunna git it, I'm afraid.