Donald Trump

If You Freak Out Over This Trump Fan Video, You're Playing Into His Hands

For many of the president's biggest supporters, pushing back against "Trump Derangement Syndrome" is their raison d'être.

|

The president recently tweeted out a pro-Trump video created by the irrepressible memester Som3thing Wicked (Twitter account here, YouTube channel here). It is, in my opinion, mesmerizing, slightly nausea-inducing, and brilliant. Some of the stats are off (Trump's approval rating is 51 percent in a single, outlier poll; his average approval rating peaked at 45.5 percent the week he entered office and is mired in the low 40s), outdated (the regulations repealed figure is from last year), misleading (crime was been dropping for decades before Trump took office), or missing altogether (no mention at all of the explosion of debt under Trump). But it hits all the bases for Trump's base: crowing about judges, economic growth, paid family leave, deporting illegal aliens, defunding Planned Parenthood, and record-low unemployment rates for minorities and women.

It's also funny: Watch carefully and you'll see the bull's balls sway gently in the section highlighting the Dow's rise, and it's hard not to read the lion logo that appears at the end as a shrewdly calculated fuck-you to #resistance types always on the lookout for links between the president and the alt-right. The rave-up music, which sounds like a great riff the old anarcho-pranksters KLF might have come up with, is hilariously over-dramatic, which only adds to the trolling quotient. Take a look:

Does watching this video push all your anti-Trump buttons? Does it make you sputter with rage? Does it make you ashamed that such a vulgarian is your president? If so, it's working almost certainly as intended. But here's a word to the wise: Every time you gnash your teeth and rend your garments over what a disgusting, déclassé, embarrassing piece of protoplasm Donald Trump really is, you're making him stronger. He's like the old Marvel supervillain The Blob, a psychologically unstable mutant who gained strength whenever he was attacked. You're simply not going to beat Trump by talking about his inability to tie a tie properly or insisting that he is "an extinction-level event" when it comes to "liberal democracy and constitutional order."

As Windsor Mann notes in The Week, Trump supporters cite his personality, not his policies, as what they like most about him:

Trump has done nothing that another Republican could not do, and do better. What distinguishes Trump from other Republicans is his behavior….Republican support for Trump is not about ideology or policy. It is psychological.

In a related way, Reason's Robby Soave noted right after Trump's election the billionaire in part "won because leftist political correctness inspired a terrifying backlash." When you strip away Trump's personality, his demonstrated inability to spell or speak in polished phrases, and his general crudeness, his platform is not seriously different from the standard-issue Republican Party platform of income tax cuts, deregulation, and a never-mind attitude toward spending and deficits.

He is unapologetic in waging a trade war, but George W. Bush levied tariffs on steel and timber during his time in the White House. Trump is fiercer in his rhetoric about illegal aliens than any president since Bill Clinton, whose 1996 reelection campaign praised his zero tolerance for undocumented immigrants, but his policies are not that different from those of Barack Obama, who also pushed a "Buy American" program that was wildly popular among Democrats back in the day. If you think immigration policy is going to be vastly different under, say, Bernie Sanders (who frets that too many poor people want to move here) or Joe Biden (who was deporter-in-chief Obama's vice president), you're focusing on the sizzle, not the steak.

What should be shocking to people are the ways in which Trump deviates from worn-out GOP positions and embraces some Democratic policies too. He's been good on criminal-justice reform, for instance, has spoken out against military adventurism, and was better than Hillary Clinton on ending marijuana prohibition. He has been more forward on school choice than any president and he embraces paid family leave too. These are not all good things, in my view, and his negatives, especially on immigration and trade, are disturbing as hell. But especially from a libertarian perspective, he's a mixed bag, as are all presidents.

Put slightly differently, he is mostly an abomination, but that merely makes him the most recent president, not history's greatest monster.

Trump and his sharpest supporters are shrewd folks who, in their heart of hearts, know that the president is not going to top the 46 percent of the popular vote he eked out in 2016. His path to victory in 2020 is a hard one that will involve minimizing enthusiasm and turnout for the eventual Democratic nominee by making the primary candidates and their supporters appear deranged, unhinged, and extreme. In 2016, Hillary Clinton and her supporters played into this strategy perfectly by taking her support among swing voters and eventual victory for granted. Today's Democrats, helped along by a number of often-unconvincing #NeverTrump conservatives who are now denouncing exactly what they stood for a few minutes ago (hi, Joe Walsh!), are making Trump's job easier with almost every passing day. Such antics harden existing Trump supporters.

At the same time, each call to give away more "free" stuff and every charge of racism, Russian influence, and undermining of the American experiment lobbed against Trump will only alienate the 38 percent plurality of voters who identify as independent (just 29 percent call themselves Republicans and only 27 percent cop to being Democrats). What independent is not going to be insulted when reading invective like this from supposedly learned and objective political scientists—in this case, Rutgers' Ross K. Baker, writing in USA Today?

I am now hesitant defending what I used to refer to as the "genius" of the framers of the Constitution because I no longer have confidence in the checks and balances that James Madison assured us were "auxiliary precautions" to prevent our government from going off the rails at times when the wisdom of the American people is faulty. The faultiness of that wisdom is, in my mind, on vivid display by the man they chose to lead the nation.

The smarter course of action for all of us who didn't vote for Trump and don't plan to in 2020 is to engage in a substantive critique of the actual effects of his policies and to offer an alternative that does more than attack the president's many character flaws and rhetorical awfulness.

NEXT: New Hampshire Woman Can Keep Her 'PB4WEGO' Vanity Plate

Editor's Note: We invite comments and request that they be civil and on-topic. We do not moderate or assume any responsibility for comments, which are owned by the readers who post them. Comments do not represent the views of Reason.com or Reason Foundation. We reserve the right to delete any comment for any reason at any time. Report abuses.

  1. If You Freak Out Over This Trump Fan Video, You’re Playing Into His Hands

    Fixed

    1. If freaking out is playing into his hands then isn’t fact checking what is rather overtly a propaganda video from a politician like trumping his discard or playing high card to his low card or something?

      Highlighting that a single outlier poll said his approval rating is 51% makes him ‘not wrong’.

      1. it’s no different from any other stupid fucking piece of propaganda shat out by any politician trying to get elected.

        1. Watch carefully and you’ll see the bull’s balls sway gently

          I mean, FFS, wax on those cartoon bull testicles a little harder wouldja?

          1. waxing bull testicles sounds like a fun weekend.

            1. Waxing Bull Testicles sounds like a GREAT name for a garage band!

                1. Sorry, gotta agree with him on this one. That would be a great name for a band!

                  1. Hihn gets a fuck off on general principle. If he said something decent, it’s just some peanuts in a turd, or what everyone calls “Tony’s lunch”

                2. Not every autistic posting here is a Hihn sock.

                  1. That’s just what a Hihn sock would say. And I should know, because I am one.

                    1. No you’re just another douchebag sock who isnt Hihn.

        2. Also 1 in 4 girls on campus are raped and Eileen make 77 cents on the dollar…

          1. Wait for the ad depicting Bernie rolling around in his Prius with a hammer and sickle on the bumper chasing down minority children to put them in his healthcare brackets.

            1. That would be epic! Where do I donate?

    2. The only healthy response to Trump is laughter.

        1. Only after I bring your mom some Cheetos.

          1. Ahahaha everyone is lauging at you with that weak ass failure of a post ahahahahahaja

          2. “Your mom” and “cheetos”? That was the best you had?

        2. He doesn’t have a penis, silly

          1. He doesn’t even have a decent response!

          2. Ahhahahahaha i cant stop laughing at how pathetic you are ahahahajaj cheetos ahahahahhaj what the fuck is wrong with your loser ass aahahahahahaj

            You got

  2. For many of the president’s biggest supporters pushing back against “Trump Derangement Syndrome” is their raison d’être.

    Fixed that for you. Without Trump Derangement Syndrome there would be almost no reason to vote for him. The only reason I’d even consider voting is because of his enemies, he has all the right ones.

    1. Similarly, and in agreement with above. It’s a ‘B’ campaign ad at best. It’s not an attack ad. His face isn’t omnipresent throughout. He’s not depicted handing out nickels to orphans… but what really makes it A+ is that Nick Gillespie is writing articles telling to people to watch for the bull testicles in it.

      I can’t tell if Nick, who’s normally opposed to Trump axiomatically, is repulsed, turned on, or both.

      1. I’m almost positive nick is the only guy at reason who actually considered and would consider casting a vote for the guy. He’s both but reading his pieces you can tell he understands the appeal of the fuck you vote.

        1. Nick?

          Nick Gillespie?

          Damn.

          That’s just…just dumb.

        2. Nick as much as said he would vote for Trump in the latest Reason podcast.

          1. Let’s be honest, the potential democrat choices are pretty awful. No Jim Webbs in the bunch. That sort have been driven out of the party.

        3. Completely agree. If you actually read Gillespie’s pieces and listen to the podcast, he actually has a pretty good bead on him I think. Shit, after CPAC or whatever the fuck it was, didn’t he (Gillespie) write a column about how Trump just showed why he is going to be reelected in 2020?

          Seems to be Suderman is the one that is always responding back to Gillespie with “nah uh, Trump can’t win. You’re wrong.”

          1. Nick Gillespie is as pro Trump as a libertarian can be . To mis-use a phrase, he praises him with faint criticism.

            1. Trump is the most libertarian president even more so than Reagan. The one criticism is the deficit and debt, but Trump can’t win that battle against Congress so doesn’t fight it.

              I’ve voted for every libertarian presidential candidate since 1980, and Trump has my vote for 2020. Sometimes I think Reason has been so reflexively critical of whoever is president (and rightly so), but I think their overdoing it when they should be celebrating the libertarian victories.

    2. That’s a fucking retarded reason to vote.

      Speaking of fucking retarded, have you seen Trump speak lately?

      1. That’s a fucking retarded reason to vote.

        So, advocating taking the vote away from retards, foregoing votes on any issues/candidates deemed retarded, or just freaking out about hearing an honest and potentially disagreeable but not at all invalid reason that you don’t like?

      2. Oh he’s fucking retarded. But he literally has all the people I dislike as enemies. The entire republican establishment, national review, the Bill Kristols, the dnc is apoplectic and the sjw crowd. you know the biggest douchebags of all time. He’s a knuckledragging carnival barker from queens who only cares about his brand, money and fucking hot chicks that automatically makes him better than the troglodytes on both sides who care nothing but enriching themselves and their friends under the guise of being adults. Because if nothing else he at least is bringing a new set of robber barons to the whitehouse instead of the regular cast.

        1. Trump retarded? I wish to God I was that retarded.

          1. Retarded like a fox!

      3. If it comes down to Trump vs Sanders and I am in a swing state; I’d hold my nose and vote Trump, despite my view that he is petty tyrant. Sanders policies seem full on tyrannical in comparison. But I’ll vote for whatever turd the LP squeezes out.

        1. Trump should announce he’s running for the Libertarian nomination too.

          1. Can he enter the Dem race?

            1. Trump, Jr should run Democrat.

              Ivanka Trump should run as a Libertarian.

              Jared Kushner should ask to be Prime Minister of Israel.

              Watch Lefties spontaneous combust.

          2. lmao, that would be epic trolling! I would actually vote for him if he ran on the LP ticket!

      4. As opposed to the retarded and lazy fucktard reason you vote based on who will give you the most free shit, esmeralda?

        1. He’s voting Warren so she’ll forgive his 250k in student loans.

      5. Yep. He’s retarded. And you? The resident jackass of a comments section. A truly accomplished individual.

        1. Trump parlayed his retardation into the most powerful office in history.

          Which is why Tony hates him. Tony thinks he’s better that Trump, but the scorecard says Tony is getting routed.

      6. “That’s a fucking retarded reason to vote.”

        This from the shitstain who voted for that fucking, crooked, hag.

      7. Maybe so, but it’s just the flip side of what many Democratic voters will do in 2020: any Democrat, no matter how fucked up, just because it will send the Trumpkins around the bend.

      8. It’s a ‘fuck you’ to the hysteria in reaction to him. It’s a true ‘fuck you’ to the media and the retards in the DNC.

      9. Tony, Trump lives in your mind.

  3. A “terrifying” backlash? Geez. Always with this “end of the world” crap.

  4. If You Freak Out Over This Trump Fan Video, You’re Playing Into His Hands

    And Nick writes an entire freak out article about it.

    Yah.

    The flesh is gone. The maggots have all grown up and flown away, and the bones of Reason are crumbling into dust.

    1. What freak out? I’m not seeing it. A large chunk of the article is about how Trump isn’t significantly different from other presidents, and that talking about the fact that he’s a boorish person is pointless and devoid of substance.

      1. Just as nobody would have cared if Obama behaved boorishly.

        Oh wait, it would have been the biggest scandal in the history of the universe.

        1. lol. k. As if. If Obama was a cad who was throwing his dick around like JFK it would be celebrated as cool and fashionable, I know this because I was alive during Clinton.

          1. Maybe the Khalidi tape actually has him opening with “where all da white wimmen at?”

        2. Perhaps, perhaps not.

          But if Obama was well-known for being a douchebag for decades and spent the first three years of his presidency continuing to be a douchebag, then Republicans constantly screaming “BUT HE’S A DOUCHEBAG” would’ve probably gotten pretty tiring too.

        3. Tony actually believes obama wasnt protected by the press and just foiled the antagonistic press with a scandal free presidency. Tony is stupid.

        4. Just as nobody would have cared if Obama behaved boorishly.

          Oh wait, it would have been the biggest scandal in the history of the universe.

          Because it’s the one issue that they would trade Obama for Trump on today. Their ‘well-behaved’ candidate was Mitt Romney and they decided, in looking at Obama, Romney, Trump, and Clinton that either non-boorish behavior wasn’t on the table and/or that policy was more important.

        5. “Oh wait, it would have been the biggest scandal in the history of the universe.

          Why does shitstain here forever post his fantasies? Is it because reality is but a distant acquaintance?

        6. Obama used the Presidency to cultivate his brand.

          And now he’s cashing in.

          The little hypocrite pulled it off. You can’t take that away from them.

          1. You can not watch anything he produces on Netflix or cancel Netflix and tell those dipshit executives why you dropped them.

            Boycotting works.

            I am waiting for that person who is so good at something they get awarded the Nobel Prize and turn it down because its a plastic trophy now.

        1. You seem to have mistakenly just linked to the article itself, rather than providing any evidence or argument. Give it another go?

      2. What freak out? I’m not seeing it.

        It’s right behind those balls Nick wants you to pay close attention to. Just past the obsessive refutation.

        1. So you couldn’t find it either.

          1. I gave you the link. You just don’t like it and are having a little tantrum lololol

            1. …yes, you linked to this article that we’re both commenting on right now. Why you think that’s some sort of victory is beyond me. What a strange person you are.

              1. Don’t… eh, fuck it.

                1. Nah I know. It’s a slow workday.

                  1. Ahahahha tantrum harder crybaby ahahah

              2. “yes, you linked to this article that we’re both commenting on right now. Why you think that’s some sort of victory is beyond me”

                Ahahahahah thats why youre being laughed at, you got what you asked for and it is beyond you ahahahajaajaja

                You DONT UNDERSTAND AHAHAHAHAHAHAHJAJAAHAHAHAHAHAHAHJAJAH

      3. I agree, the claims of boorishness mostly come from the statists who treat us far more rudely when they take our stuff and our freedoms, while Trump is boorishly willing to point out things to foreign leaders like the USA is footing more than it’s share of the NATO bill. That’s speaking truth to power IMHO, which is kind of ironic given Trump is president.

        But it’s obvious the political establishment of both parties is against him. And normally while I don’t like the fact that Congress delegated powers to the executive branch so they aren’t held accountable for their laws, and so we don’t know what the laws are until we pass them and the bureaucrats write the details, right now I’m happy Trump is rewriting what he can into fewer and less oppressive regulations. And they gave the president trade deal/tariff making powers as well. They’re so pissed someone like Trump (instead of like Obama or Bush) has that power now, but it’s a result of what they’ve done.

  5. Is it making him stronger though? Anyone who is on the Trump train now is staying there. That’s a given. Near everyone has made up their mind on him one way or another and I don’t much seeing that change save for a change in the economy.

    Stupid bs videos don’t play into it one way or another.

    1. Is it making him stronger though?

      I think the argument is that it’s making his opponents weaker.

      All Nick is really saying is that constantly screaming that Trump doesn’t know a sorbet spoon from a caviar fork is not endearing to the independents that the Dems need in order to defeat him, when people would be more persuaded by accurate descriptions of stupid things he actually does.

      1. It makes his opponents weaker”

        Is an excellent point because if there was anyone with similar goals that we could trust to not be a RINO, he/she could give Trump a run for their money but the problem is the republicans in general have lost the trust of the people, hence Trump who is actually trying to fulfill his promises.

    2. Yup. Trump is being re-elected because everyone is already in decided mode and the majority of states will decide TRUMP.

  6. “In a related way, Reason’s Robby Soave noted right after Trump’s election the billionaire in part “won because leftist political correctness inspired a terrifying backlash.” ”

    There’s your ugly but true summary, IMHO. Stupid “politically correct” folks in media, education, and government circles did NOT know when to quit!!!

    Have they learned yet??!?! Trillion-dollar question right there…

    1. I reject political correctness.

      We should call a bigot a bigot. Call a deplorable backwater a deplorable backwater. Call a superstitious rube a superstitious rube. And call the depleted human residue that remains in our can’t-keep-up rural and southern stretches after generations of bright flight the Trump base.

      1. We should call a bigot a bigot. Call a deplorable backwater a deplorable backwater. Call a superstitious rube a superstitious rube. And call the depleted human residue that remains in our can’t-keep-up rural and southern stretches after generations of bright flight the Trump base.

        I thought you said you reject political correctness.

      2. Most people reject your very existence because you’re the almost human equivalent of a corn infested turd circling the bowl.

        1. That’s an insult to corn

      3. “I reject political correctness.”

        So do I, you fucking bigoted asshole.

        1. OBL is more entertaining

      4. We should call a bigot a bigot.

        We do. Every time you open your mouth. Bigot.

        Call a deplorable backwater a deplorable backwater.

        It’s easier just to call the excrement filled, disease and crime ridden cesspools by name, LA, San Francisco, Chicago, New York, Portland, Seattle, Detroit, DC….

        Call a superstitious rube a superstitious rube.

        It doesn’t help–you’re not quite sure what ‘rube’ means.

        And call the depleted human residue “family”, jest like yew do, eh, Artie? Because, as you’ve told us, you like nothing better than sucking that thing growing out of your sisters ass that you think might be hir penis–but it might jus’ be another finger, s/he’s got 16 already.

        1. If there is ever a Reason convention I wonder if any of the thirds here (Tony, Arty, Pedo Jeffy, Kiddie Raper, Squirrely, Hihn, etc.) would dare show up.

          1. I attended a Ron Paul rally. It was interesting to watch a group of anti-social malcontents gradually leave their shells and experience what it is like to be accepted and part of the mainstream, if only briefly. But if you’ve seen one group of half-educated, extremist right-wing misfits, you’ve seen as many as you need to see.

      5. It’s ok. Everyone is running back to the rural areas now to escape the seas of sidewalk turds in major coastal cities.

    2. Have they learned yet??!?!

      A lot have, but less-than-fully-intelligent people will keep screaming these things until long after the rest of the country has moved on and they make themselves into social pariahs for doing so.

      This is how these sorts of things die – they don’t go gently, they go loudly, annoyingly, and embarrassingly.

    3. “Have they learned yet??!?! Trillion-dollar question right there…”

      Learned what? That they might get votes if they were willing to change their positions to support what voters actually vote for?

      Instead it appears they’ve largely decided to go all-in on importing a new set of voters.

  7. So we here in the normal plane of existence just have to sit here while people continue to beshit themselves in a spiral of degeneracy as they try to salvage their ego by defending this obviously mentally ill lunatic who happens to run the free world?

    Can we just not? Does anyone actually think this is going to end well for Trump? Can we at least contain the damage to him and the many brown people he’s killed and caged?

    1. Can we just not? Does anyone actually think this is going to end well for Trump?

      The net is closing.

      1. Walls closing in! Markets imploding!

    2. Yes, it will end with him leaving the presidency in 2020 or 2024, and enjoying the rest of his life. Recent history shows most presidents enjoy a good life after office and they are all just as shitty as him.

    3. hahahaha. Tony you expect us to believe you care about brown people after you sucked obamas dick for 8 years while he started new engagement supporting starving kids in yemen, creating a slave market in lybia by overthrowing quadafi and exasperating a civil war in syria. Lest we not forget deporting and caging more latinos than bush?

      1. also doubling down in Afghanistan.

        1. And don’t forget that Syrians, Libyans and Afghans didn’t become “brown people” until we attacked them. I think they would be surprised, and probably somewhat insulted, by the moniker.

          1. And don’t forget that Syrians, Libyans and Afghans didn’t become “brown people” until we attacked them.

            I was going to say similar. Persecution of brown people is judged on a scale that slides whimsically between total melanin oppressed and melanin concentration per dead body.

            Fuck all caucasians except the ones actually born in and who can trace their ancestry back in the actual Caucasus Mountains for a thousand or more years, they aren’t caucasian.

        2. Sell guns to the cartels that killed brown people. Drones, lots and lots of drones killing brown people. Continuing the drug war with gusto. Not really using pardon/clemency until the end of his term.

          1. Don’t forget Guantanamo. He promised to close it and give all the brown people incarcerated there their day in court. He promised to do that first thing.

      2. To be fair, Tony would’ve sucked Obama’s Dick if he hadn’t done all those things.

        1. Tony would suck Hillary’s cock too.

    4. So we here in the normal plane of existence just have to sit here while people continue to beshit themselves in a spiral of degeneracy as they try to salvage their ego by defending this obviously mentally ill lunatic who happens to run the free world?

      No. You completely missed the point of the article.

      What he’s saying is that if you want to do something about Trump, frame your criticisms accurately and avoid the hyperbole and self-righteous class-based posturing that has characterized the #Resistance movement so far.

      1. ^This. But I’ve had this very conversation with Tony myself; he’s not going to take your very sensible advice.

        1. he’s not going to take your very sensible advice.

          Oh, I know, but I like to believe there are lurkers here who are less ideologically committed.

      2. Trump is an insanely mentally ill clown of historic proportions. And he has very small hands.

        Accurat.e

    5. Tony is proof positive of the old adage that crazy people dont know they are crazy.

    6. “So we here in the normal plane of existence just have to sit here while people continue to beshit themselves in a spiral of degeneracy as they try to salvage their ego by defending this obviously mentally ill lunatic who happens to run the free world?”

      Tony
      August.30.2019 at 12:40 pm
      Just as nobody would have cared if Obama behaved boorishly.

      Oh wait, it would have been the biggest scandal in the history of the universe.

    7. If you authoritarian psychopaths weren’t such authoritarian psychopaths and could instead rationally argue that maybe just maybe we need a smaller government and less power in the executive branch, then we’d be more interested in your side. Instead, we are told that we just need a different authoritarian in power.

      I’ll never cease being amazed at the left thinking Steve Bannon was super authoritarian when he said the Trump administration was going to deconstruct the administrative state.

      1. I’ll never cease being amazed at the left thinking Steve Bannon was super authoritarian when he said the Trump administration was going to deconstruct the administrative state.

        Well, Tony has argued repeatedly that ‘forcing’ people to be free is just the same as oppressing them, so this probably calcs with him.

      2. ++

        “If you authoritarian psychopaths weren’t such authoritarian psychopaths and could instead rationally argue that maybe just maybe we need a smaller government and less power in the executive branch, then we’d be more interested in your side. Instead, we are told that we just need a different authoritarian in power. “

    8. Oh look the Okie white faggot rube standing up for “brown people!” What a hero!

      1. To be honest being 100% turd makes Tony a brown person too.

    9. While the Democrats are busy sorting through their own mentally ill lunatics to put up against him.

    10. Please cite where Trump has killed anyone. Of course you no better then the people who still claim Reagan killed a million aids victims because he said the truth of the time, the only way to not get aids is to put a condom or share needles. Its embarasing when the leader of the free world had to tell people to put a condom on.

    11. And yet you didn’t freak out over your Messiah murder-droning weddings and earning the nickname Deporter-in-Chief. It’s almost like you’re a cynical hypocrite.

      More likely though you’re just ignorant. When you get all your news from NPR that tends to happen…

      1. No it was okay for Obama because he spoke articulately (ask Biden).

    12. I’ll give you a point for “beshit” and leave you alone, for now

  8. He’s like the old Marvel supervillain The Blob, a psychologically unstable mutant who gained strength whenever he was attacked.

    Gillespie, time to let Suderman go. He has infected you.

    1. Fact check: the Blob had limited control of his mass, and “couldn’t be moved”; he didn’t gain strength when attacked. That would be like Sebastian Shaw (the Black King), or “Strong Guy”.
      I suppose the attempt to juxtapose Trump and someone called the Blob was too temping…

      1. So that was fake news! Dammit Gillespie stick to the Velvet Underground for references going forward.

        Despite all the attempts at amputations
        You know he will just go out
        And dance to his own rock ‘n’ roll station

        1. His life was saved by rock & roll. And it still makes him feel hip.

      2. Goku also gains strength when attacked. Well, actually he gained strength when his friends were attacked. RIP Krillin

  9. For many of the president’s biggest supporters, pushing back against “Trump Derangement Syndrome” is their raison d’être.

    For people who aren’t Trump supporters, pointing out TDS certainly leads to a lot of laughs.

  10. Trump fights back and he has thin skin. The constant and escalating lib attacks on any R is ridiculous. Reagan both Bushes also received it but only Reagan fought back some. I wish Trump took some lessons from Reagan but not his style.

    Heck Mitt Romney was also a racist when running for president.

    Nick what D libertarian candidate are you for?

    LOL

  11. How strong can Trump get?

    There just aren’t enough half-educated bigots, superstitious slack-jaws, white supremacists, and shambling malcontents left in America to support a viable national electoral coalition for Trump.

    He needed a longshot three-cushion bank shot at the Electoral College the first time, and that was four years of electorate evolution — less white, less religious, less rural, less bigoted, less backward — ago.

    1. Keep it up, Rev. You’ll have him reelected in no time.

    2. So you’re saying the country has vastly improved on his watch? Interesting….

      1. Hes saying that a higher proportion of anti-gay and anti-abortion people (blacks and hispanics) in the electorate is a good thing.

    3. “There just aren’t enough half-educated bigots, superstitious slack-jaws, white supremacists, and shambling malcontents left in America to support a viable national electoral coalition for Trump.”

      That’s why voter suppression is so important. The best way to subvert American elections is to undermine confidence and interest in them. That’s why Russians sponsored propaganda was about independence for California and Texas etc, and American stooges eagerly followed suit. Remember, you don’t have to come in first to win a presidential election.

      1. Russia, really? Voter suppression? You do realize that that kind of statement is exactly what Gillispie is talking about don’t you?

        1. I’m pointing out, not freaking out. What have you got against voter suppression? It’s a time honored way of rigging or delegitimizing elections.

          1. That’s assuming any voter suppression took place (spoiler: it didn’t).

    4. Trump doesn’t need to be strong. He just needs to be less bad than whatever candidate the Ds finally throw up.

      Based on the candidates in the race now, that’s a pretty low bar.

  12. Good Lord, what a confused mess the original post is. Some points :

    (1) Can we please have a moratorium on the stock-cliche that Trump’s base are such butthurt snowflake losers that the slightest criticism of their Orange God drives them to riot in mindless rage? I can’t think of another politician whose core supporters must be wrapped in downy cotton and never told unpleasant facts.

    (2) Trump supporters “cite his personality, not his policies”, because they see the nation’s business as professional wrestling : Mere entertainment and more entertaining the more blatantly phony it is. That’s what Rush, Sean & Fox have made out of today’s Right over these last few decades.

    (3) Gillespie spends half his post making the (unpersuasive) case Trump’s actions are no different than any other president, then concludes by saying criticism must focus exclusively on those actions because of snowflake supporters and (somehow) Marvel Comics. The second half of his argument forgot the first. Exactly why is Trump the most unpopular president in recent history if his policies are so milquetoast and loathsome boorish behavior just makes him stronger?

    (4) Last election the American people were conned into electing a conman in part because they found Ms Clinton too “corrupt” -despite the fact Trump is a thousand times more corrupt than she’ll ever be – and too “dishonest” – despite the fact Trump lies more in an average month that Clinton in a quarter-century. I think even more emphasis on Trump’s character will prove instructive, both before and after he starts slimming his eventual opponent.

    (5) One last bullshit Gillespie cliche : Despite the hysterical attention “political correctness” gets, it’s still only a shallow tiny stream of trivial nonsense. It’ll will never be more than the mask or symptom of larger background issues and dissatisfaction.

    1. Most unpopular president in recent history? Trump is roughly in line with where obama and Reagan were at this point in their presidencies, slightly beyond clinton and way ahead of carter.

      https://projects.fivethirtyeight.com/trump-approval-ratings/

      The only recent presidents that blow him out of the water are los dos bush.

      1. Trump’s special distinction is he’s never been popular. Aside from a few outlier polls he’s never even been above 50% – not once by Gallup. A few months back Quinnipiac polled 53% of people saying they “definitely will not” cast their ballot for Trump. Of course that’s barely meaningful this early, but I doubt you’d find similar numbers for any other recent POTUS.

        1. “Trump’s special distinction is he’s never been popular. ”

          Are you pretending you didn’t just respond to this

          Most unpopular president in recent history? Trump is roughly in line with where obama and Reagan were at this point in their presidencies, slightly beyond clinton and way ahead of carter.

          https://projects.fivethirtyeight.com/trump-approval-ratings/

          The only recent presidents that blow him out of the water are los dos bush.

          It’s like you don’t even realize we can see you’re wrong.

          1. Hilarious. I don’t know if you think you have a point, but you don’t. NEWSFLASH : All presidents poll low at some point in their presidencies, but only Trump has spent his entire term rarely creeping out of the low-forties and NEVER once getting his head above fifty percent for more than the briefest time. Now, that’s a pretty simple fact, easily grasped by the most dimwitted understanding.

            So why don’t you get it ?!?

            1. I think what’s hilarioilus is that after ALL THAT, you still can’t admit you were wrong.

              “NEVER once getting his head above fifty percent ”

              Oh wow, an arbtrary number you decided on.

              “Now, that’s a pretty simple fact, easily grasped by the most dimwitted understanding.”

              And the fact that it doesn’t prove what you say because “Trump is roughly in line with where obama and Reagan were at this point in their presidencies, slightly beyond clinton and way ahead of carter”

              You’ve basically made the case that NO president in recent memory has EVER been popular, which is of course, the exact opposite of what you’ve been trying to portray.

            2. Also, you’re OBVIOUSLY Hihn/SQRLSY and you can fuck off.

    2. No matter who’s in the room with Mz. Clinton they are assured of being the lesser evil.

      1. Yet Trump is way more corrupt and dishonest (it’s not even close). No doubt you have a more metaphysical definition of “evil” to fall back on?

        Actually, the irony doesn’t stop there. People also voted for Trump because he was a “successful businessman”, despite the fact his business career has been a string of failures, redeemed only by hundreds of millions in Daddy’s money. Voters thought he would “clean up the swamp”, which makes his shit-show administration tragically funny. They also believed he would bring a businessman’s focus and order to the White House. They got complete chaos, and a president with the attention span of a small child.

        1. “Yet Trump is way more corrupt and dishonest”

          Imagine being this dumb

          1. No kidding.

            Call me when Trump pulls a Benghazi shenanigan and breaks the law with a private unsecured email. I know. These are nothing to idiot progressives but they don’t realize what Hilary did was pretty damn bad and people went to prison for far less.

            1. Or when Trump uses disaster replied donations to his charity to award contracts for rebuilding Haiti in exchange for campaign contributions.

        2. “despite the fact his business career has been a string of failures”

          This is such a fascinating look into the thoughts of someone with TDS, as though the number of failures somehow disqualify the eventual success.

          No no, you’re right insane person, the only good businessmen are the ones who get it right on the first try lololololo

          1. Sigh. Let’s do the history :

            (1) Trump started his career staked with tens of millions in Fred’s money. He blew through it all.

            (2) Daddy cleaned up junior’s mess and re-staked him with tens of millions more. Trump then had some initial success – this was the period of the Trump Tower deal – but then blew-up everything he had built with a spectacular run of grotesque bungling. This is the period of bankrupt casinos, Trump Airline, failed football teams and mega-deals which imploded. Fred kept junior from total collapse.

            (3) For the remainder of the Nineties, Trump was on a leash and kept living on a rich person’s allowance. Daddy saved the day again, this time by dying. With his inheritance and a massive sale of Fred’s assets, Trump was re-staked with hundreds of millions.

            (4) But the big deals were over. For instance the commercial wing of Deutsche Bank won’t lend to Trump, since he defaulted on 640 million and then sued the bank when they asked for their money. Trump has to go to the Personal Wealth section of DW to get anny loans. So the Trump’s focus is now on selling his name to plaster on everything from buildings to steaks, concurrent with an endless stream of petty scams. Trump University is a prime example.

            Now Trump has been very effective with his scams & branding – I’ll grant that – but his overall business career is a record of squandered millions and self-destructive incompetence. Of course, that’s by the facts.

            But Tulpa AKA “Tula” doesn’t do facts, does he?

            1. ^^^^This is what they actually believe^^^^

              1. +1000

                Trump is a genius for letting Lefties bang their heads against a wall on this stupid shit.

            2. Character is shaped by the company you keep…..
              Everything you say is absolutely correct, though seriously abbreviated. I grew up in Brooklyn & Queens with Trump constantly in the news during my progress into adulthood. Most that voted for him certainly never lived in the Tri-State area; we all knew what a corrupt, lascivious, mean-spirited clown he was. Anyone that voted for him obviously never did their homework, either. The truth WAS out there. He was, is, and always will be a pig of a human being who wallows in a sty filled with the filth he’s associated himself with.
              PS: Delete ‘of a human being’

              1. Most that voted for him certainly never lived in the Tri-State area; we all knew what a corrupt, lascivious, mean-spirited clown he was.

                You say that as if those who did vote for him weren’t aware of it. The Tri-State area certainly doesn’t possess any exclusive insight into a guy who’s been in the national spotlight for 40 years.

                He was, is, and always will be a pig of a human being who wallows in a sty filled with the filth he’s associated himself with.

                I can’t think of a better term to describe pretty much everyone who lives in NEW YORK CITY than “filth.”

        3. Your characterization of Trump’s businesses is utter bullshit. You really are the sort of tool that gets his talking points from ‘Media Matters’ and their ilk. It isn’t a surprise, as you are a known liar here.

    3. Wow, grb, way to go! I liked the below out-take especially…

      “…they see the nation’s business as professional wrestling : Mere entertainment and more entertaining the more blatantly phony it is.”

      I would dearly love to see adults instead of jokers, clowns, and “pro wrestlers” in our political orifices!!!

      1. Yeah, I had a pretty strong feeling you were socking with grb. You have a hard time hiding how stupid and crazy you are.

        1. We KNOW He can Make America Great Again, because, as a bad-ass businessman, He Made Himself and His Family Great Again! He Pussy Grabber in Chief!
          http://www.theatlantic.com/politics/archive/2017/01/donald-trump-scandals/474726/

          “The Many Scandals of Donald Trump: A Cheat Sheet”
          He pussy-grab His creditors in 7 bankruptcies, His illegal sub-human workers ripped off of pay on His building projects, and His “students” in His fake Get-Rich-like-Me reality schools, and so on. So, He has a GREAT record of ripping others off! So SURELY He can rip off other nations, other ethnic groups, etc., in trade wars and border wars, for the benefit of ALL of us!!!
          All Hail to THE Pussy Grabber in Chief!!!

          Most of all, HAIL the Chief, for having revoked karma! What comes around, will no longer go around!!! The Donald has figured out that all of the un-Americans are SOOO stupid, that we can pussy-grab them all day, every day, and they will NEVER think of pussy-grabbing us right back!

          1. That’ll happen in Nov. 2020 when the pussy-grabber will have to go back to private pussy-grabbing, as the decent public that was pussy-grabbed grabs back the WH.

            1. I like it! So let it be written, so let it be done!

              1. Yeah Squirrely, you can get some totes awesome defender of freedom like Bernie Sanders or Liz Warren in office.

    4. I think you missed the point of the article.

      You seem to be complaining that Nick points out that Trump’s supporters don’t care about his boorishness and that the constant impulse by his enemies to poke at his boorishness only makes his supporters like him that much more.

      Do you disagree with that?

      Are you disagreeing with the suggestion that his critics should stop hyperventilating about vague phantoms and address actual things in the real world?

      Do you really believe that Nick was arguing that Marvel somehow makes Trump stronger rather than that he was using an analogy? Do you not recognize that your seemingly-intentional misunderstanding of this is exactly the sort of thing Nick is talking about?

      And Trump is “a thousand times more corrupt” than HRC? Really? You feel comfortable making this assertion based on what? That you believe everything negative you hear about Trump and nothing negative you hear about HRC?

      1. Square = Circle,

        I’ll highlight a few points of disagreement :

        (1) The idea criticizing Trump’s childish or boorish behavior just makes him stronger is simply dumb. First, because the political base supposedly energized by this criticism is going to turn out for Trump anyway. They’re a hopeless case and I don’t get why they need to be coddled. Second, Trump is already paying a political cost for his character, seen in his exceptionally low polling numbers – particularly in certain demographics, like suburban women.

        (2) We have a president who lies like a compulsive psychopath, has a tenuous grasp of facts in the real world from moment to moment, and possesses the self-discipline of a toddler (a brattish one at that). With any previous POTUS, those traits would be considered “actual things in the real world” I don’t see why Trump merits special treatment.

        (3) I think it’s funny Gillespie sold his “Trump is a special case” theory with Marvel Comics. You don’t, hey, no problem….

        (4) There’s a lot said about both Clinton and Trump, much of it partisan. It’s impossible to quantify the “corruption” of both, so let’s use the yardstick of Foundations as a rough guide :

        Clinton’s is a top-rated charity which got AIDS medicine to plus-minus eleven million people in Africa (literally saving millions of lives), opened health clinics in India and supplied malaria medicine to scores of thousands in the Philippines. It is a professionally run organization with an independent board, and the Clinton accrue no financial benefit from it whatsoever.

        The Trump Foundation was a scam, not even registered in the state it operated. It’s board was a handful of family members who sometimes went a decade without meeting. The CFO of Trump’s business was on the board for years without his knowledge (per testimony he gave under oath). Before it was shut-down, the Foundation served as a petty cash till for Trump’s expenses, paying zoning violations for his business properties and buying oil paintings of DJT for his golf clubs. Most comically, the Foundation paid Don Jr’s Boy Scout fee of seven dollars.

        Now, I don’t care how deeply you burrow down into the fever swamp or how many wack-a-loon Clinton conspiracy theories you produce, the Trump Foundation will always “a thousand times more corrupt” than the Clinton Foundation, and that’s being exceptionally generous to Trump. Extrapolate that across Trump’s entire sleazy career and you find your answer…..

        1. (1) You’re still missing the point. Nick isn’t saying you’re going to persuade Trump’s supporters. He specifically agrees with you that you’re not going to. What he’s saying is that the constant hyperbole and outright lies coming from the left-wing political establishment are actively alienating people who are not otherwise Trump supporters.

          (2) Continuing from point (1), this would included things like referring to Trump as “a compulsive psychopath.” Complaining that you don’t like his personality may be personally satisfying to you, but if you want to stop independent voters from shaking-their-damn-heads at your hysteria, maybe talk about things like trade policy, and be sane about it.

          (3) No – what you said was that Nick “concludes by saying criticism must focus exclusively on those actions because of snowflake supporters and (somehow) Marvel Comics.” You see, this impulse to grab onto some superficial thing that you can take out of context and twist around to make it sound crazy and stupid is exactly the kind of thing Nick is talking about that is driving people away from your side.

          (4) Clinton’s is a top-rated charity that got “top-rated” late in the 2016 election after criticism over money accepted from foreign governments and scandals like the Haiti housing program was stamped down. The Clinton Foundation “is a professionally run organization with an independent board” that consists of a lot of people who coincidentally also worked on the Clinton campaign.

          The Clinton Foundation’s ability to raise money dropped off really drastically after she lost the election. Why do you suppose that is?

          I, for one, agree that “It’s impossible to quantify the “corruption” of both,” and find it hilarious that you proceed to do exactly that.

  13. Let me interrupt this Hihn and Tony show to offer the following observation:

    “…what a disgusting, déclassé, embarrassing piece of protoplasm Donald Trump really is, you’re making him stronger. He’s like the old Marvel supervillain The Blob, a psychologically unstable mutant who gained strength whenever he was attacked”

    As someone here commented a few months back, “fighting with Trump is like wrestling with a pig; you just get dirty and the pig likes it.”

    I’d cite this but cannot remember the poster.

    1. excuse me, Hihn, Tony, and Rev show.

    2. Don’t know about the application to Trump but the more general quote that you should “Never wrestle with a pig. You both get dirty and the pig likes it” has been variously attributed to Mark Twain, Abraham Lincoln, and George Bernard Shaw. It’s likely that the saying predates all of them – and it certainly predates anything posted here.

      1. I believe the phrase was first attributed to a Sumerian pig farmer.

        1. Written down on a cuneiform clay tablet no less…

          1. I’m guessing that wasn’t clay.

    3. Trump is so good that when faces Lefties in a Twitter duels, Lefties end up shooting themselves in the face.

    4. Usually attributed to George Bernard Shaw. It may predate him, but this certainly fits his style.

  14. Bernie Sanders (who frets that too many poor people want to move here)

    Bernie Sanders is at least being honest in pointing out a problem that’s real, and impossible to discuss without people doing the invasion-of-the-body-snatchers screech and shouting “racist”.

    This has been quietly discussed on the left for some time– that when you take in a large number of immigrants — and in particular, refugees, they tend to settle in the poorest neighborhoods which put stresses on housing and jobs in those areas. And as one former Trotskyite revolutionary socialist said, “The people in those neighborhoods don’t care much about the new fucking restaurant on the corner or the fact that they can now hire a nanny for much cheaper than they could the year before…”

    Yes, as a gLibertarian, I do believe that these things correct themselves as markets adjust, but they take time– and if you want less racism and more openness, then you need to regulate incoming immigration more carefully so you don’t allow resentments to build in those poorest neighborhoods. And you might just avoid another four years of Donald Trump. You know, if that’s your goal.

    1. ” then you need to regulate incoming immigration more carefully so you don’t allow resentments to build in those poorest neighborhoods. ”

      Don’t you mean ‘the government needs to regulate…? ‘ As a gLibertarian, don’t you feel embarrassed calling for more jack booted regulation or agreeing with a communist? And since when is building resentments in the poorest neighborhoods any business of yours?

      1. Don’t you mean ‘the government needs to regulate…?

        Of course I do.

        As a gLibertarian, don’t you feel embarrassed calling for more jack booted regulation or agreeing with a communist?

        No, I’m not a total anarchist, I accept that we have things like police and internationally recognized borders. BTW, if you learn something about Marxism and Marxists, their goal was to destroy the nation state. As one former Marxist said, “We didn’t give a shit about immigrants, we just felt that the elimination of recognized borders was the quickest path to destroying the nation-state.

        And since when is building resentments in the poorest neighborhoods any business of yours?

        When is my concern about resentments in the poorest neighborhoods any business of yours?

        1. “When is my concern about resentments in the poorest neighborhoods any business of yours?”

          Because it doesn’t sound like the concerns of a Libertarian, who believe in ‘live and let live.’ They also distrust the government coercion. What’s with the attachment to a ‘nation state?’ When has that been a Libertarian cause? You seem to be more of a run of the mill rightist than a hive-hating individualist. Ever try reading the inspirational writings of Ayn Rand?

          1. Does it frustrate you that some of the people on this site are free thinkers rather than rigidly ideological dispensers of doctrine?

            1. The guy says he accepts police and borders, then goes on to propose expanding government duties to regulating poor neighborhoods so that resentments don’t build up. Something tells me this free thinker is no libertarian.

          2. Ever try reading the inspirational writings of Ayn Rand?

            Read her books.

            When I first came to libertarianism, I was a little more Democrat leaning and, like you, I didn’t really give a shit about poor people and considered anyone below a certain education or income level yokels to be ignored. I’ve changed over the years and have concerns about the damage our welfare system has done to various populations (among other well-meaning policies). I also recognize reality and am not a utopianist. I recognize that if one goes to sleep, one might wake up with his property stolen or even his throat slit. So like a crazy right-wing fanatic, I realize that the world recognizes these things called borders and as such, I respect other countries’ borders as well.

            But I wish you luck in your mother’s basement. Tell her ‘hi’ for me.

            1. “I respect other countries’ borders as well.”

              I have experience crossing borders. Many times. I’m sick of it. Borders are fine if you have no interest in crossing them. Others are treated one indiginity after another, being herded like cattle, questioned, searched, etc. Only government can preside over such a sorry scene, and a libertarian has no business accepting it.

          3. “it doesn’t sound like the concerns of a Libertarian,”

            LOL.

        2. Well said. We definitely share perspecives on this, Diane. It’s funny because I don’t really see this as a gLibertarian argument you’re making regarding regulating immigration to stem native population resentment. It’s actually a utilitarian argument, something that will earn you no friends among Libertarians.

          1. It’s actually a utilitarian argument, something that will earn you no friends among Libertarians.

            ^ This. This is the one argument that has also gotten me to soften my ‘open borders’ stance. As Marx once observed, the guy who has no food and no place to live doesn’t really care about your ideology or how ‘in sum things are better for most people.’

            He cares about himself and himself only.

            Even if you can demonstrate on paper all day long six ways from Tuesday that immigrants are a net add to the economy and benefit everyone in the long run, the guy who lost his job today to an immigrant isn’t going to hear you.

          2. I suspect Mr. Sanders might have read a little Milton Friedman where he warned of broad and generous welfare systems coupled with loose immigration policies.

            If we could dramatically reduce the footprint of our welfare systems, we could loosen up our borders (more than they already are). But even then, at a given moment jobs are a finite resource. Markets shift and adjust, and any good, well-behaved card-carrying libertarian knows that job markets usually right themselves over time. But if you suddenly flood a discreet market with new labor at one end of the economic spectrum, that can be disruptive to the existing labor pool.

          3. It’s an anti-utilitarian argument. It places the interests of a particular group – the people already in that poorer neighborhood – against the interests of anyone who wants to move there (presumably because – for them – it is still seen as a step up. And it also presumes that the original occupants are largely there because they don’t have a better place to go.

            The greatest good for the greatest number is not remotely the issue there.

      2. Have you considered the flip side to that? I find it odd that “progressives”, who typically insist that everything be regulated, have exactly the opposite attitude regarding immigration.

        1. “I find it odd that “progressives”, who typically insist that everything be regulated”

          Try discarding some assumptions and giving the matter more thought. Putting oneself in another’s shoes is one trick that leftists have found can help.

          1. Why discard ‘assumptions’ that are mostly observation, and largely valid ones at that?

            Oh, right. What you were really saying is: Shut up.

            1. “What you were really saying is: Shut up”

              Not at all. I just meant that if your thinking comes to an impasse, a change of perspective might help.

      3. He’s acknowledging the reality of a welfare state. There’s a reason both sides talk about it. Don’t be like Reason and try to keep up.

      4. “don’t you feel embarrassed … for … agreeing with a communist”

        If the idea has merit, you don’t always have to disagree just because of the ideology of the person embracing it.

        1. You mean, the essence of free-thinking libertarianism isn’t making sure to think the exact opposite of Bernie Sanders on every issue whatsoever?

          I’m gonna have to rethink some things . . .

        2. “If the idea has merit,”

          It’s not just any idea, it’s that Sanders’ and Trump’s economic policies seem to overlap a great deal. Especially the protectionism. Economics is at the heart of communism, It’s not just some incidental idea that Sanders has.

  15. “his demonstrated inability to spell or speak in polished phrases”
    This is of course entirely accurate. But as Nick notes this is a feature not a bug. Gutfeld often opens his show with clips of Trump berating reporters or speaking at campaign events. The dude is hilarious. Yeah he talks like some guy from Queens. Because he is some guy from queens. I find his twitter tirades stupid and counter productive. But everybody’s twitter rants are stupid and counter productive.
    Speaking of Gutfeld, I can’t help but think that the show would be better if they hired an ombudsman.

    1. Nick enjoys a shit sandwich more if the turds are polished.

    2. He’s far more authenticate than Obama. And I don’t know what the fuss was all about Obama’s oratorical skills. He was pretty meh if not over rated. Still don’t know exactly what he’ll be remembered for.

      Oh. His brand.

      1. Still don’t know exactly what he’ll be remembered for.

        I’ll put my money on “first black president of the United States.”

        1. Lol.

          For being born half black.

          Awesome. Give him an award. Any. It doesn’t matter. They’re all garbage anyway.

          1. You did say you were wondering what he’ll be remembered for. I mean, you gotta know I’m right about this. Lol

  16. if you freak out over a video you need help period.

  17. “The smarter course of action for all of us who didn’t vote for Trump and don’t plan to in 2020 is to engage in a substantive critique of the actual effects of his policies and to offer an alternative that does more than attack the president’s many character flaws and rhetorical awfulness.”

    LOL. Good luck with that. Enjoy your continuation of taking L’s, and L does not stand for Libertarian

    1. “his demonstrated inability to spell or speak in polished phrases”

      So substantive. Pointing it out is Yeoman’s work.

    2. It’s like the Democrat party and their antics don’t exist.

      The chances of that happening are ZERO.

      1. Well, Soros funds Antifa, Charles Koch funds Reason and Cato, and Soros and Koch are buddies these days, so Nick has to be sure to lick the hand that feeds him…which means ignoring the nasty behavior of friends of the boss’ friend.

    3. That is not bad advice, except what about the effects of the policies of a viable alternative? What argument does an anti-Trumper make if their position is effectively pro-Biden, Sanders, Warren or Harris?

  18. The conundrum the leftists face is that if they call Trump a moronically moronic moron, they have to either admit that a moronically moronic moron is capable of running the government, which means it doesn’t actually take a genius like Warren or Clinton or Hirono or themselves to do it, or they have to argue that, despite all the evidence as plain as the nose on your face, this country is in fact fucked up beyond all recognition after letting this moronically moronic moron take the wheel.

    Personally, this is what annoys me about the cultists here – Trump must be a genius because, look!, he’s President, isn’t he? Nope, Trump’s still a retard and a truly horrible human being, retarded horrible human beings are perfectly capable of being President – see for example about 19 of the last 20 Presidents we’ve had.

    1. I don’t really think anyone cares what you think because you stupidly think people have said “Trump must be a genius because, look!, he’s President.”

      If you’re annoyed by something that never happened, and think people are cultists because of said delusion, you’re Jerryskids.

    2. Whatever bad things they call Trump, Trump has bested them at every turn.

      According to name calling by Lefties, a moron beat every single one of them at the game. Which implies that Lefties are even dumber than a moron.

    3. I assume you’re suggesting Calvin Coolidge is the lone non-retard? If you’re going back as far as 20 presidents, shouldn’t Grover Cleveland get a nod?

      1. Correction, Grover Cleveland is 22 back from our current president, so he would not be in the conversation of which of the last 20 presidents could be considered a non-retard.

      2. Cleveland would be just barely excluded by “the last 20,” but while Cleveland talked a good game, he was no prize. To him “lassaiz faire” meant “use the force of government to provide advantages to American businesses.”

        He admitted toward the end of this life that he hadn’t really practiced what he preached as president.

        1. Of course he was a mixed bag, but I assumed we graded all these butt holes on a curve. He was more Libertarian than Nicholas Sarwark or Bill Weld will ever be.

          1. Fair enough.

    4. I think some people who lean libertarian resent having to ‘defend’ Trump against the baseless accusations that are harming civil discourse and how the country is governed. Think Kavanaugh, mental illness, Russia!, and how everyone is a white supremacist.

      Or just listen to anyone in the DNC field. They’re bloody nuts. I rest my case.

      It’s not Trump per se defended but what he represents in the face of these groundless and hysterical attacks.

      1. Someone posted this here some years back. Still feels fresh.

      2. I think some people who lean libertarian resent having to ‘defend’ Trump against the baseless accusations that are harming civil discourse and how the country is governed.

        THEN DON’T DEFEND HIM. It’s not that hard!

        Take for example, l’affaire Kavanaugh. I can understand a libertarian-leaning person saying “well I don’t think Kavanaugh is a good pick for SCOTUS based on his Fourth Amendment jurisprudence, but I don’t think he’s a rapist either”. But that is not what we were entreated to here on these forums. We got instead “MUST CONFIRM KAVANAUGH IN ORDER TO SPITE THE LIBS”. And in so doing, went into the trenches in defense of Trump’s pick.

        It IS possible to take a middle ground between “Trump is a Nazi” and “Trump is the best”, you know.

        1. Trump is Peter Pan?

          I got nothing.

        2. More than a handful of us take that position, you just happen to exclusively respond to the people that piss you off the most.

        3. People aren’t “defending Trump”, they are defending the rule of law and objecting to unacceptable behavior. Kavanaugh needed to be confirmed because he was lawfully nominated, qualified, and supported by a majority of senators, end of story.

          This confuses you because you hate the rule of law and you want to engage in character assassination and libel in order to accomplish your political objectives.

          1. Kavanaugh needed to be confirmed because he was lawfully nominated, qualified, and supported by a majority of senators, end of story.

            Now do Merrick Garland.

            1. Merrick Gardland.

              You mean the guy the Senate Majority Leader decided wasn’t worthy of support?

              Ok.

              Done.

        4. Really Pedo Jeffy? We wouldn’t know it from your shitposts here.

  19. Trump. Still better than Trudeau.

    My God if you want a corrupted, shitstained, weasel go read up on this inept douche and his ragtime bunch of amateurs in the Liberal party.

    The idiot wanted to eliminate the capital gains tax. In the process he would have destroyed millions of Canadians plans for retirement and wealth prosperity. The trust-fund parasite then has the balls to keep saying he’s ‘fighting for the middle class’.

    Fuck you Justin and fuck you Bill Morneau.

    If it wasn’t for a massive push back, we would have all been stuck with assets suddenly hit with an unforeseen tax burden.

    1. Wouldn’t eliminating the capital gains tax be a good thing?

      1. My mistake. Taxing it 100%. It’s eliminating the tax advantage I meant.

      2. I’m guessing there’s a crucial word missing in there.

        1. And I was right.

  20. Well-made video. Like any political content it can use some asterisks, but it does well to motivate support.

    His opponents’ are in the unenviable position of traipsing in pessimism (why else elect someone else?) and, as a result of their policy prescriptions, no small amount of hypocrisy. They are left hoping that the economy tanks, unfortunately; nobody wants their progressive dystopias.

  21. Yes because it’s Trump who calling everyone racist and all of the other “ists” and phones.
    NOT
    Is Reason satire?

  22. I love TDS: it reveals liberal/libertarian phonies for what they actually are.

    1. +10

      I can’t wait until Trump wins re-election and most of the reason staff quits to go to Canada.

      Poor Rufus will get constant knocking at his front door.

      1. They won’t leave. Instead look for Boehm to post five TDS articles a day that endlessly repeat “Orange man bad!!!!!!!!!!!” Two hundred times each.

  23. Trump has done nothing that another Republican could not do, and do better.

    This is hilarious. I mean, I don’t know whether another Republican could do what Trump has done, but I’m sure as shit that any other Republican candidate of recent memory would not do what Trump has done.

  24. “Republican support for Trump is not about ideology or policy. It is psychological.”

    Or, more accurately, all three. Now you know why I don’t really care that he’s a wrecking ball of a President with a drunken crane operator that can defy the laws of gravity.

  25. Trump and his sharpest supporters are shrewd folks who, in their heart of hearts, know that the president is not going to top the 46 percent of the popular vote he eked out in 2016.

    Hey, Nick? Trump will get more votes than he did in 2016, and may well finish with a higher percentage of the popular vote as well. And this is from someone who voted third party in 2016. Do the math.

    In 2016 Gary Johnson got 4.5 million votes (3.28%), an increase of roughly 3 million from the his total in 2012. And some CIA putz named Evan McMullin got another 750,000 (0.54%) votes by screaming “I’m a Republican who’s not Trump!” That was because the GOP was fractured over the fact that a boor like Trump won the nomination. Trump won despite that fracturing, because clearly none of those anti-Trump voters wanted Hillary to win either.

    Unless there’s a recession or Trump starts a dozen new wars in the next year, there’s a snowball’s chance in hell that whatever stiff the Libertarian Party nominates will get more than the 1% of the national vote they usually get, and a similar snowball’s chance of Joe Walsh getting more votes than what McMullin got — assuming Walsh chooses to run as a third party candidate after he fails to get the GOP nomination. How many of the people who voted for Johnson or McMullin in 2016 (3.82%) will pull the lever for Sanders, Harris, Biden, or Warren? I’m confident in saying it will not be a statistically significant number. Most will go to Trump if for no other reason than RBG’s imminent open SCOTUS seat.

    Here are the states in 2016 that went for Hillary by less than the number of voters who voted for Johnson and McMullin, along with the number of Electoral College votes each state cast.

    Colorado (9), Maine (4), Minnesota (10), Nevada (6), New Hampshire (4), New Mexico (5)

    That’s 38 EC votes that Trump could have taken if Johnson had gotten only a million or so national votes like the LP normally does. That would be a 344-194 electoral ass-kicking instead of the merely convincing victory Trump got.

    1. Here are the states in 2016 that went for Hillary by less than the number of voters who voted for Johnson and McMullin, along with the number of Electoral College votes each state cast.

      The only potential gets I could see there are New Hampshire and Maine. New Mexico and Colorado are on the precipice of being one-party Dem states thanks to a MASSIVE influx of mostly Mexican, Hispanic immigrants in the last 20 years, along with a similarly large migration of Dem-voting shitheads from California, Illinois, and New York in the last 10 years in the former. Nevada is controlled by Vegas, which is loaded with Dem-voting welfare queens. No way Minnesota turns unless the morale of the St Paul/Minneapolis axis is utterly crushed.

      I actually wouldn’t be surprised at this point if Trump won again, but only if the Dems go full retard and nominate someone who makes “punish white people” a plank of the election platform. Someone who focuses entirely on economic concerns can actually go after him, but the minute candidate Warren or Harris promise free medical care for illegals/gun-grabbing after the convention, they’ll tank their support. The people who voted for Obama, then voted for Trump, don’t give two shits about abortion, trannies in bathrooms, or Pedro and his kids.

      1. All those states I mentioned went for Hillary by a smaller margin that what Johnson and McMullin got combined, but you still call them basically locks to vote Democrat. How many of those aforementioned third-party voters do you think will pull the lever for whomever Team Blue’s superdelegates crowns?

  26. Nick, you have lost your mind.

    You’ll come back to the stuff you’ve written over the last couple of years when all of this is well into the past, and then maybe you’ll be able to see it.

    This article is intellectually incoherent.

    Plus, it’s a video by a politician bragging about his accomplishments. That’s what they do. It isn’t 4D chess. Clinton still brags about a balanced budget that he actively opposed. That’s how politicians roll. They jump in front of any parade they can find and pretend that they drew the crowd. Complaining about cherry picking a favorable poll number is just silly.

    1. “If You Freak Out Over This Trump Fan Video, You’re Playing Into His Hands”

      No, you’d just be insane. Why would anyone freak out over this?

      ” which only adds to the trolling quotient. ”

      What? Trolling? You think this is trolling, Grandpa? You need to get out on the intertubes more. This could be a PragerU video.

      *This* was trolling. #Trump4EVA
      https://twitter.com/realDonaldTrump/status/1142157838153895941

  27. Author Nancyboi Nick clearly has his panties in a bunch

  28. “Trump has done nothing that another Republican could not do, and do better.”

    Dishonest. Not surprised.

    Trump’s signature policies are border control, economic nationalism, less global policing, and an America First foreign policy generally.

    Which of the GOP establishment, the right wing of the Globalist Uniparty, was going to deliver anything but the *opposite* of all those policies?

    They’ve made noise about the border for decades, but keep the cheap labor coming every time. They were also equally outraged at taxes on Slaver Xi as Reason. And of course, the Neocons were running foreign policy.

    That Nick is unaware of how Trump deviates from the prior GOP establishment orthodoxy lacks credibility, given that he has two writers banging away 24/7 against border control and economic nationalism, and has himself declared Open Borders the core value of Reason’s “libertarianism”.

    1. Not to mention that Trump kicked the absolute hell out of 16 other candidates (most of them establishment candidates, many with far more political experience) in the 2016 GOP primary for the simple reason that GOP voters knew exactly what establishment Republican policy was about and wanted no part of it.

      He didn’t crush Jeb Bush just because he made a few biting nicknames about him that stuck…he crushed Bush because nobody wanted an open borders squish who was going to cave to the Democrats on every major policy proposal once the press turned on him. They were tired of the last decade of Republican globalists and wanted someone whose agenda was American interests first.

      And America First is what Republicans were about prior to the Bush years…in case Nick forgot.

  29. “Trump supporters cite his personality, not his policies, as what they like most about him”

    That is not true with any of the hundreds of supporters that I know. We all hate his personality but love his policies. This is more fake news. I’m sure there are some that love his personality, but they are by far the minority trump supporter. I think trump haters have a hard time realizing who the trump supporters are. They want to think they are the uneducated, poor, country bumpkins. While those people are included, they don’t vote and the true trump supporters are well educated small business owners that are self made millionaires and billionaires. They are more rural and suburban than urban. They are educated, well known and liked in their local communities, very charitable, and outgoing. They don’t go to rallies, fly confederate flags, or wear MAGA gear. They are the people that own the grocery and hardware stores, the car dealership, and the local service businesses. They are salt of the earth people, very different from Trump. They hate the way he speaks, tweets, and lies. They hate his grandstanding. They would never want to hang out with him on a personal level. However they believe he truly has american business in mind, and believe in his america first message. He has done great things for small business from tax cuts to regulation reform.

    1. I’m going to say that you’ve overgeneralized Trump supporters as well. I support the guy for his policies first, but have no problem at all with his personality…primarily because the people against whom he directs his nastiest are generally some of the most despicable people you’ll meet.

      He doesn’t generally start fights…he’s a counter-puncher (as he says). He works with people who disagree with him politically all the time (Rand Paul is a good example here, as is Thomas Massie)…but when they trash him, he trashes them back, generally worse than he got. He follows basic game theory…he’ll be nice to you if you’re nice to him, but when you cross him he’ll make you pay for it because he knows that letting someone slight him with impunity just encourages more of it. No reasonable person should have a problem with basic reciprocity.

      And I’ll say it…if you actually sit and listen to him speak, he’s a hell of a lot more funnier and more clever than he’s given credit for. The man’s a premier insult comic, but he doesn’t unleash it on anyone who hasn’t brought it on themselves first.

  30. If Trump legalized weed he’d win 45 states.

  31. He is right that we don’t manufacture anything. People don’t get what inflation means.

Please to post comments