Donald Trump and the Bitch-Slap Theory of Electoral Politics

Donald Trump

The latest Trumprage:

Trump on rally protester: ‘Maybe he should have been roughed up’

Donald Trump said Sunday that the protester who interrupted his rally at a convention center here on Saturday morning was “so obnoxious and so loud” that “maybe he should have been roughed up.”

Mercutio Southall Jr. — a well-known local activist who has been repeatedly arrested while fighting what he says is unfair treatment of blacks — interrupted Trump’s rally and could be heard shouting, “Black lives matter!” A fight broke out, prompting Trump to briefly halt his remarks and demand the removal of Southall.

“Get him the hell out of here, will you, please?” Trump said on Saturday morning. “Get him out of here. Throw him out!”

At one point, Southall fell to the ground and was surrounded by several white men who appeared to be kicking and punching him, according to video captured by CNN. A Washington Post reporter in the crowd watched as one of the men put his hands on Southall’s neck and heard a female onlooker repeatedly shout: “Don’t choke him!”

As security officers got Southall on his feet and led him out of the building, he was repeatedly pushed and shoved by people in the crowd. The crowd alternated between booing and cheering. There were chants of “All lives matter!”

“Maybe he should have been roughed up, because it was absolutely disgusting what he was doing,” Trump said on the Fox News Channel on Sunday morning. “I have a lot of fans, and they were not happy about it. And this was a very obnoxious guy who was a trouble-maker who was looking to make trouble.”

That was a change in tone from just a month ago, when Trump would regularly tell his audiences not to harm the protesters who often infiltrate his rallies.

“Don’t hurt ’em,” Trump said at a rally in Miami on Oct. 23 as pro-immigration activists were led out. “You can get ’em out, but don’t hurt ’em.”

he Republican front-runner has long made provocative statements a hallmark of his campaign. Critics and rivals have said that Trump is stoking racial tension. Former Florida governor Jeb Bush said Trump’s comments about Islam are “manipulating people’s angst and their fears.”

Saturday’s racially charged altercation occurred in Birmingham, famous in the 1960s as a center of the civil rights struggle. The thousands who attended Trump’s rally were nearly all white in a city with a black majority.

Southall told the news site that the commotion started as he began recording himself and other protesters at the rally and saying that he wanted “Donald Trump to know he’s not welcome here.” Southall said someone knocked the phone out of his hand and made a racial slur. Then there was pushing and punches started flying, Southall told the news site.

A swarm of security officers quickly made their way through the crowd of several thousand, got Southall off the ground and walked him out of the building. Trump has had Secret Service protection since Nov. 11, and those who attend his rallies and political events must now walk through metal detectors and have their bags searched.

“He was so obnoxious and so loud, he was screaming,” Trump recounted in the Fox News interview on Sunday. “I had 10,000 people in the room yesterday, 10,000 people, and this guy started screaming by himself.”

As Southall was removed Saturday, Trump recounted how Democratic presidential candidate Bernie Sanders responded to Black Lives Matter activists who came onstage during an event earlier this year.

“You see, he was politically correct,” Trump said. “Two young women came up to the podium. They took over his microphone. I promise you, that’s not going to happen with me. I promise you. Never going to happen. Not going to happen. Can’t let that stuff happen.”

Before the fight broke out, Trump had warned the audience that Islamic State fighters might recruit their children online and called for an impenetrable wall along the southern border, prompting the crowd to chant: “Build a wall! Build a wall! Build a wall!” In his nearly hour-long speech, Trump listed graphic details of killings committed by people who had entered the country illegally, promised to bar Syrian refugees from living in the United States because they might be terrorists and called for heavy surveillance of “certain mosques.”

“I want surveillance of these people that are coming in, the Trojan horse. I want to know who the hell they are,” Trump said. “I don’t want the people from Syria coming in, because we don’t know who they are. We don’t know who they are. And I don’t want them coming in.”


From the media area, reporters strained to see what was happening Saturday at the Trump event here in Birmingham. As CNN reporter Jeremy Diamond managed to make a video of the incident before Trump staff forced him back into the media pen. As the video circulated on social media that night, some of Trump’s supporters took to Twitter to call the protesters “thugs,” “Dem plants” and a variety of obscene names. Several wrote that the protesters opened themselves up to the possibility of violence by attending the rally.

Trump grew agitated as reporters shifted their focus to the protesters and away from him and his thousands of supporters.

“Look at those bloodsuckers back there,” Trump said. “They’re turned around, and they’re following the people, right? Because you have a small group of people that made some noise and are being thrown out on their ass. Right?”

The crowd roared with cheers.

Good luck finding photographic or video proof of Southhall’s claims. And he didn’t require any medical attention afterwards.

But I wanted to talk about something else.

Is Donald Trump a bully? If he is, will that hurt him with the voters?

Here’s something from an article by Josh Marshall that he wrote back in 2004 (before he lost his mind) talking about the “Swiftboating” of John Kerry:

There is a meta-debate going on here, one that I’m not sure even the practitioners fully articulate to themselves and one that I’m painfully aware the victims don’t fully understand.

Let’s call it the Republicans’ Bitch-Slap theory of electoral politics.

It goes something like this.

On one level, of course, the aim behind these attacks is to cast suspicion upon Kerry’s military service record and label him a liar. But that’s only part of what’s going on.

Consider for a moment what the big game is here. This is a battle between two candidates to demonstrate toughness on national security. Toughness is a unitary quality, really — a personal, characterological quality rather than one rooted in policy or divisible in any real way. So both sides are trying to prove to undecided voters either that they’re tougher than the other guy or at least tough enough for the job.

In a post-9/11 environment, obviously, this question of strength, toughness or resolve is particularly salient. That, of course, is why so much of this debate is about war and military service in the first place.

One way — perhaps the best way — to demonstrate someone’s lack of toughness or strength is to attack them and show they are either unwilling or unable to defend themselves — thus the rough slang I used above. And that I think is a big part of what is happening here. Someone who can’t or won’t defend themselves certainly isn’t someone you can depend upon to defend you.

Demonstrating Kerry’s unwillingness to defend himself (if Bush can do that) is a far more tangible sign of what he’s made of than wartime experiences of thirty years ago.

Hitting someone and not having them hit back hurts the morale of that person’s supporters, buoys the confidence of your own backers (particularly if many tend toward an authoritarian mindset) and tends to make the person who’s receiving the hits into an object of contempt (even if also possibly also one of sympathy) in the eyes of the uncommitted.

This is certainly what Bush’s father did to Michael Dukakis and, sadly, it is what Bush himself did, to a great degree, to Al Gore.

In other ways, Bush’s bully-boy campaign tactics play to his strengths, albeit unstated and unlovely ones. Many of the polls of the president have shown that while people don’t necessarily agree with the specific policies he’s pursued abroad many also intuitively believe that there’s no one who will hit back harder. There’s some of that ‘he may be a son-of-a-bitch but he’s our son-of-a-bitch’ quality to the president’s support on national security issues.

This meta-message behind the president’s attacks on Kerry’s war record is more consequential than many believe.

Trump’s critics say he’s a clueless oaf. Perhaps there is more to him than meets the eye.

Remember that first debate? According to conventional wisdom Donald Trump should have been on the defensive, apologizing and explaining his offensive comments about women. Instead he flipped the script and went on the attack against Fox News. Result? He shot up in the polls.

Trump acts like a bully and says outrageous things, then refuses to back down or apologize. Trump is still in first place. Coincidence?

I am no Trump fan, but maybe it’s time to consider the idea that he knows what he is doing and is in it to win it. Sure, he turns some people off. But he doesn’t need to win all the votes, he just needs more votes than the other guys (and gals).

So far, it’s working.


Posted in Uncategorized | 111 Comments

We Tell Ourselves Stories

Mairie 2015France’s “September 11” arrived a few months late, on a Friday the 13th. I took the picture a few days afterwards at our city hall because the juxtaposition of the two signs pretty much sums up the ambiguous response of the public at large. The sign on the left—the one with the heart and the Arabic script—says, “My heart is not at war, my heart is for peace. We are all human. No to terrorists!” The sign on the right says “France is at war!” Because this city is both a departmental capital and a university town (and one with a sizable Muslim population to boot), I’m hearing more of the former sentiment than the latter, but of course, it really depends on the person to whom you’re talking. If you asked one of my colleagues at the university what we should do, they would probably respond in a manner similar to your average American professor: we’re all people, we need to let the “refugees” in because they’re running from the same folks who did this to us, and I’m sure you all pretty much know the rest by heart. If you asked my mother-in-law the same question, she would probably blister your ears with a response that would make Marine LePen sound like Barack Obama.

Me, I’m afraid that what is going to happen is that we’re going to repeat the policy failures that came out of the Charlie Hebdo massacre back in January. And apropos of nothing, did you know that the spectacular Charlie Hebdo/Hypercacher Jewish Market attack didn’t exactly come out of the blue? I’m pretty sure that the only people who were surprised about that were our government officials and people who don’t watch the news, because in the six weeks leading up to the attacks, there was a terrorist attack at a police station in Tours on December 20 by a dual national who had recently converted to Islam, followed the next day by an vehicular assault by a man shouting “Allahu Akhbar” in five neighborhoods in Dijon that the government attributed to the driver’s mental illness, followed the next day by a second, similar automobile attack at the Christmas market in Dijon, which the government dismissed as the act of a mentally ill driver while simultaneously proclaiming that France was suffering an unprecedented and “grave danger” from terrorism. Three weeks later, the Charlie Hebdo attack occurred. The government’s response: A national day of mourning, repeated reassurances to the Muslim community, more than 50 arrests and a dozen prosecutions of people charged with being “apologists for terrorism,” and for a while, a more visible military presence in public, primarily protecting government buildings, synagogues, and tourist attractions in Paris.

On the local level, we saw individual schools implementing much tighter security—the gates to my children’s Catholic school are now permanently closed and parents are buzzed in if they arrive at any time other than the beginning or end of a school day; similarly, the lycée where I work part-time shut its gates immediately, but waited until the beginning of this school year to implement a card-entry system for students, teachers, and employees. That’s pretty much it. You can still get on a train going just about anywhere but Britain with zero screening and zero security other than the presence of military in the major cities’ stations (to the dismay of the passengers on the Thalys that was attacked—and saved mostly by Americans—this summer). There is still not much in the way of security in public places such as shopping malls, libraries, and the outdoor markets that the French love so much. Until last week, there was pretty much no security at theaters—something that has now changed, at least at the opera and the larger theaters.

Basically, I hear people throwing around terms like “France’s 9/11” and I get the feeling that we’ve been here before, we’ve done this before. The signs up all over town urging people to fight the terrorists by hoisting a glass of wine in a popular local tourist area reminds me of George Bush telling us to support America by going to the mall. A president with a 16% approval rating before the attacks declares a war on jihadism and calls for a “global military coalition with France at its helm.” “Temporary” governmental powers, such as a ban on public gatherings in Paris, that are now being extended, perhaps to be extended again. Does all of this sound a little bit familiar? Of course, although the United States has experienced a few smaller-scale attacks since 2001 (such as Nidal Hasan’s “workplace violence,” a classification that even Mother Jones disputes), American civilians have, for the most part, remained safe against terrorism. I do wonder if world leaders aren’t just playing a game of whack-a-mole with these guys—cut them off from the United States, boom they start killing people in London, Toronto, Madrid, Paris instead. And the American government’s job is to keep Americans safe, Britons care about Britons, and the next attack is in some city that never expected it.

All that said, Hollande and his government are proceeding to make some new and different mistakes, most notably with respect to our foolish agreement to take 30,000 “Syrian” “refugees” even though we now know that at least two of the attackers traveled to France through Greece, slipping in with the crowd. Even though we know—from the Pew Research Center—that only 20% of the refugees are actually from Syria, that 72% of them are men, and that men aged 18-34 represent 43% of asylum seekers. So we’re planning to let in thousands of military-aged men, most of whom are not escaping ISIS in Syria, and the remainder of whom are apparently mostly content to let their women and children stay in Syria and take their chances. And by the way, you can buy a “Syrian passport” for as little as $250. How is opening the gates a good idea?

To those who say “There were only 8 attackers in Paris! Such a small number compared to the thousands who need our help!”—I respond that this is a country in which 40% of the doctors use homeopathy— the pseudoscience that claims it is possible to obtain a substantial reaction from potions whose active ingredients are diluted to nearly imperceptible levels. Another mistake that we are making relates to militants who are already in the country: unlike in the States, French security services can and often do remove suspected militants from our records of people linked to terrorist organizations. Those files should be permanent. Third, not only did France ignore advance warnings of the possibility of an attack (shades of 9/11 again), we have been sharing essentially open borders with countries such as Belgium, which has a security service that is underfunded and overwhelmed, yet apparently we did not effectively exchange information with that country—which served as a staging area for the Paris attacks, apparently for that very reason. If we want to live in a United States of Europe (me, I’m skeptical), we might do better to listen to Ben Franklin’s warning that “We must, indeed, all hang together or, most assuredly, we shall all hang separately.” (Or, in somewhat stronger language, Bassem Braiki, a Muslim rapper from eastern France who has called for his co-religionists to report extremists.) If we’re going to have open-ish internal borders, Angela Merkel cannot unilaterally decide to invite more than half a million people knowing that there is no way to contain them in her own country. Nor should we continue to consider EU membership applications from countries such as Serbia (home of my ancestors and probably dozens of cousins) and Turkey, both of which are sending a relatively large number of people.

Ultimately, what is the most frightening is the prospect that there is no solution, there is no good answer. Bomb Raqqa this month, get bombed by “homegrown” terrorists next month. Seal our borders for real, kill our economy (well, the part of it that isn’t already dead) and get kicked out of the EU. Extend the current state of national emergency—warrantless searches with few limits, no public gatherings, Internet blocking by the government, house arrest without trial—at at some point, France becomes more like China than, well, France. Live in fear? Same problem. What we tell ourselves is the right and just thing to do for our country, our children, our future—no dithering, no “return to normal” like after Charlie Hebdo—well, that’s going to determine whether this time, things will be different.

Posted in Uncategorized | 122 Comments

Overnight Open Thread

This happened last night. Trump was not there so it didn’t get much attention. The candidates were allowed to give long, serious answers. It’s over three hours long.

If you like food fights this is probably not for you.

The old thread was full so use this one until Jadzia’s First Post goes up tomorrow morning.


Posted in Uncategorized | 26 Comments

Woodrow Wilson Under the Bus


In a stunning reversal, and in solidarity with Princeton’s Black Justice League (PBJL), vile progs have tossed President Woodrow Wilson under the bus. PBJL took a page from Occupy’s playbook and Black Lives Matter’s playbook (hmmmmm) and occupied the president of Princeton’s office yesterday, vowing to stay until all of their demands were met. So vile prog fanboys will know the script, our pallid friend, Dylan Matthews has the Voxplanation.

…let’s be clear on one thing: Woodrow Wilson was, in fact, a racist pig. He was a racist by current standards, and he was a racist by the standards of the 1910s…

Easily the worst part of Wilson’s record as president was his overseeing of the resegregation of multiple agencies of the federal government, which had been surprisingly integrated as a result of Reconstruction decades earlier. At an April 11, 1913, Cabinet meeting, Postmaster General Albert Burleson argued for segregating the Railway Mail Service. He took exception to the fact that workers shared glasses, towels, and washrooms. Wilson offered no objection to Burleson’s plan for segregation, saying that he “wished the matter adjusted in a way to make the least friction.”

Both Burleson and Treasury Secretary William McAdoo took Wilson’s comments as authorization to segregate.

Yep. You read that right. Wilson dodged an issue and other people did stuff. Wilson looked the other way. And that’s exactly like if he himself had ordered and oversaw it.

Wilson also had the unmitigated gall to be from the south and a descendant of confederates. DUH. Racist!

Wilson was governor of New Jersey when he became president in 1913, but he had been born in Virginia and raised in Georgia and South Carolina.


Wilson himself was the descendant of Confederate soldiers..

He also had a book quote featured in Birth of a Nation! Nail, meet coffin.

Griffith Wilson Quote BoN

Then, of course there’s Wilson’s book from which the quote was taken. It was, btw, written with a co-author, and is just as racist as the day is long. There are three cherry-picked quotes to prove it! The book was copyrighted in 1902, btw, with no date for when the material was written. But you knows these vile progs today. It’s only okay if Obama evolves.

This is all a change of tune for progressives overall. Wilson has been a Great Progressive Hero, up there with FDR & JFK & LBJ. The only difference is the lack of acronym. And for the most part, they’ve been busy drawing comparisons between Woodrow Wilson and President Obama.

  1. Here’s the WaPo in 2009 saying that Obama is Wilson’s heir.
  2. Here’s the Daily Beast, also in 2009, talking up Obama’s Wilsonian Moment as he prepared for his Nobel Prize, a feat he shares in common with Wilson.
  3. Here’s Politico in 2012 talking about Wilson being the model for Obama’s 2nd term.
  4. Here’s a Georgetown University professor crowing about how awesome Wilson, and how he should be in the constellation of Democratic Presidents, and affixing Obama to Wilson along with it. Also 2013.
  5. Here’s The Week in 2013 taking pains to make sure you associate Obama with Wilson–and not G. W. Bush–when it comes to Syria.
  6. And here’s my personal favorite, a September 11, 2013 blog post by “The Progressive Professor” making the case that Obama is as awesome as Wilson, AND Teddy Roosevelt, AND Dwight D. Eisenhower, AND JFK. 11venty!!!!!1!!1!

These are a dime a dozen. You can find a ton on Google going back to Obama’s pre-election days. Wilson has always been a progressive superstar, until there was this recent need for him to be under the bus. Now you can forget about it, because it has been Voxplained to you that Obama Wilson is directly accountable for the actions of others, his heritage is questionable, and via the use of a very foggy lens in construing quotes from his co-authored book written well before he became president.

Never forget that the 28th POTUS is a racist pig scumbag lying sack of shit. The GD Overton Window has become a roving parasite on the left, one that seeks to latch on to any political ideology, even its own, and suck the blood right of it.

Obama and Wilson are exactly alike. Except they aren’t, because only one of them signed a constitutional amendment that expanded voting rights to 51% of the population, without any qualifiers or exceptions. I’m just sayin’.

Check out that grill!

Check out that grill!

Posted in Identity Politics, Media Zombies, Racial Politics, Uncategorized | 138 Comments

Trump Derangement Syndrome

10-donald-trump-debate.w529.h352 (1)

Anatomy of a smear:

How the Media Smeared Donald Trump as a Nazi

A story is making the rounds on Facebook that claims Republican frontrunner Donald Trump is calling for “ID badges” for American Muslims. The image on the story is of Jewish children wearing yellow starts during the Holocaust. Very frightening–and a lie.

Step 1: Seed. The lie begins with a Yahoo! profile in which Trump is asked, supposedly (the reporter does not provide his exact question), if he would “require registering Muslims in a database or giving them a form of special identification that noted their religion.”

Trump does not say yes or no. Instead, he dodges the question, and comes back to the question of monitoring mosques (which the U.S. has done in the past): “We’re going to have to–we’re going to have to look at a lot of things very closely,” Trump said when presented with the idea. “We’re going to have to look at the mosques. We’re going to have to look very, very carefully.”

The Yahoo! reporter, Hunter Walker (a hater of note), construes Trump’s answer as follows: “He wouldn’t rule it out.”

Step 2: Amplify. The story is picked up by CNN. Sara Murray asks whether Trump would “rule out” a database for Muslims–borrowing from Walker’s article. Trump is surprised, and tells her, truthfully, that he never responded to Walker’s question.

Here is their exchange, as reported by CNN:

When Murray asked whether Trump would rule out a database for Muslims, he said he didn’t “know where you heard that.”

“Yahoo News asked you about it, you didn’t rule it out,” Murray said as Trump worked a ropeline after the event.

“No, I never — I never responded to that question,” Trump said.

“So would you not support it?” Murray asked.

“I never responded to that question, Sara,” Trump said.

He added that he didn’t “know who wrote it,” referring to the Yahoo News article, and declined to answer a follow-up question from Murray about whether he would “support something like that,” referring to a Muslim database.

Step 3: Distort. NBC News’ Vaughn Hillyard confronts Trump: “Should there be a database system that tracks the Muslims here in this country?” Trump replies: “There should be a lot of systems, beyond databases. We should have a lot of systems. And today you can do it. But right now, we have to have a border, we have to have strength, we have to have a wall, and we cannot let what’s happening to this country happen any longer.” Hillyard asks: “But that’s something your White House would like to implement?” Trump: “Oh I would certainly implement that. Absolutely.” Hillyard follows up: What do you think the effect of that would be? How would that work? It would stop people from coming in illegally. We have to stop people from coming into our country illegally.” Hillyard asks if Trump would go to mosques to register people. “Different places,” Trump says.

It is clear from the exchange that Trump thinks Hillyard is talking about new entrants to the United States, presumably Syrian refugees. But Hillyard reports Trump’s answer as if he is talking unambiguously about Muslims already in the United States.

You gotta go over to Breitbart to read the rest cuz I can’t steal the whole thing without getting sued.

I’m no Trump fan but if this shit keeps up I will vote for him out of spite.

Meanwhile, some radical Mormon Tea Partiers shot up a hotel in Mali and are holding a bunch of hostages.

Posted in Uncategorized | 116 Comments

Why Do Republicans Hate Women and Children?


There is a lot of discussion going on about Syrian refugees. Obama and the Democrats want you to believe that these poor souls fleeing oppression are mostly women and children. But is that true?

The refugee wave sweeping over the European Union has nearly reached last year’s total of 662,000, but despite reports that many are families from Syria just 20 percent are from that war-torn nation and most are younger men.

Eurostat, the EU’s statistical agency, said that by August, 600,000 had arrived at the union’s border seeking asylum, but just 121,500 were from Syria. The rest came from a collection of other countries including Kosovo, Afghanistan and Pakistan.


Pew noted that while the number of Syrians fleeing was lower than the impression given by the media coverage, many from other countries are claiming to be Syrian because people from that nation appear to be on the fast-track for asylum.

“Syrians are the biggest single group of asylum applicants this year, comprising about 20 percent of the total (though some refugees from other countries reportedly are claiming to be Syrian, in the hopes of improving their chances of gaining asylum). More than half the asylum seekers, in fact, are from just five countries: Syria, Kosovo, Afghanistan, Albania and Iraq. Most (72 percent) are male, and more than half (54 percent) are ages 18 to 34; men in that age bracket account for fully 43 percent of asylum applicants,” said Pew.


I really hate it when people try to manipulate me emotionally.

Look, here’s the deal – Syria is a hell hole these days. It’s been a fucked up place to live for at least a century now. I don’t blame anyone for wanting to get out of there and go somewhere better.

But there is a genuine concern that terrorists will try to slip into the U.S. and Europe by posing as refugees. There is also a concern that some Muslim immigrants have no intention or desire to assimilate into Western culture.

As usual, Obama and the Democrats are trying to demonize all opposition to their plans as racist and bigoted.

In a couple weeks it will be Pearl Harbor Day. The Left is using the shameful episode of Japanese Internment as an argument that opposition to allowing refugees to settle here is racist. But the vast majority of those people who were wrongfully interned were loyal American citizens, many of whom had resided here all their lives.

In the days following the attack on Pearl Harbor, was it unreasonable to be suspicious of Japanese nationals who were in our country? Or German nationals?

Why is it assumed that the only way to help Syrian refugees is to grant them permanent residency in America? Why aren’t we demanding that their military-age men go back and fight for their freedom? Why aren’t Muslim nations taking in these refugees?

More pictures of “women and children”:

Jihadis001 Jihadis002 Jihadis006 Jihadis007 Jihadis008 Jihadis009 Jihadis011 Jihadis018

Posted in Uncategorized | 104 Comments

Swamp Fall Hump Day

Wednesday Open Thread. Keep on Keeping on TCHers!

And an Ode to Charlie Sheen ;)

Posted in Uncategorized | 99 Comments