UNIQUELY TALENTED: Only the Democrats could have lost to Trump

This piece by Fred Reed fills in the details which I, not being an American, have been unable to grasp or articulate. psj

A great uproar goes forth from the enemies of the Trump Beast, with much gnashing of hair and pulling of teeth. He will be a terrible President, they say, and they may well be right. There are ominous signs, particularly as regards foreign policy, and he seems radically incoherent and contradictory. Interestingly, his critics have no slight idea why he won. The reason is obvious: He won because everybody was campaigning for him, in particular the media, Hillary, Black Lives Matter, Obama, Democrats, and far leftists. Everybody worked for Trump. He couldn’t lose.

The election was a referendum on Marie Antoinette’s court. It was the revolt of the unnoticed downtrodden, the financially sinking, the working classes rising against privileged snots–but it was engineered by the elites. The glittering elect of course did not say “working class,” this being a loaded phrase redolent of Marxism and of the Democratic Party of five decades back before it became a royal court. They spoke instead of disgruntled white men, racists, homophobes, sexists, and the Islamonauseated–phobic, I meant.

The rich and powerful are on display in Washington, white, well paid, secure, above average in intelligence, often from Oberlin, Amherst, Swarthmore, Yale. The better sorts of schools, you know. They cluster in Washington’s posh barrios of Bethesda, Upper Connecticut, Cap Hill, and Great Falls. They drink together and talk to each other and believe that they must be right because everyone they know agrees with them.

Theirs is not a personal arrogance–they are nice people and you would like them–but an arrogance of class. Since nobody tells them they they are either arrogant or a class, they do not know. Since everybody around them lives at a high standard, it does not occur to them that they they live at a high standard. They exist in a small mental box.

They do not know that that in the bleak down-scale strip development of Jeff Davis Highway, a half-hour away, reeking of exhaust and blowing with trash, an aged veteran on crutches lives in a dismal residential motel. Every mourning he hobbles to Dixie Lee’s Diner–I forget its actual name–for a cheap breakfast because it is all he has. Or ever will. He is waiting to die. The elite don’t know, and wouldn’t care.

The upper crust are also moral frauds, though they do not know this either. Nice liberals to the roots of their teeth, in principle they believe that we should all love each other, and they hate anyone who doesn’t. In practice, they approximate George Wallace. Ask when they last went to the ghetto for dinner, whether they have ever been in a restaurant with a majority black clientele, whether they would send their precious children to the public schools of New York. Ask whether they have a blue-collar friend.

The privileged worked hard for Trump. Every time they described his people as uneducated white males, implicit dregs, they drove votes to Donald. And they so described the working class unceasingly.

It made him President. Good, bad, or indifferent, it is how he got in.

The privileged denigrated all whites unlike themselves. Then Hillary made her “deplorables” speech, confirming her contempt for half of America–those uneducated, shapeless, dull-witted proles in Flyover Land, obese, farting and belching, swilling Bud, watching NASCAR for god’s sake in awful trailers. And why not not sneer at them? Why did Hillary need their votes? Did not Rachel Maddow love her?

For Trump it was gold, pure gold. If he had written her speech, he could not have come up with a better line to destroy her. It was the purest product of the establishment’s hubris. She did it to herself. Sweet.

It made him President.

Black Lives Matter also did yeoman work for the Donald. As they and snowflake Brown Shirts and excited millennials blocked highways and beat Trump’s supporters and shut down rallies, and vandalized cars, and of course looted, they presumably thought they were working against the Trump Monster. Not a chance. Out there in the uncharted barbarian lands between Manhattan and Hollywood, in dark primeval forests where Cro-Magnons are still a rarity, people were sick of lawlessness, and of an establishment that tolerated it. It produced more votes, perhaps not for Trump or even against Hillary but against the class that she represented.

Immigration. Here Hillary and Obama did great work for Donald. As Obama frantically brought in as many “refugees” as possible from everywhere, anywhere that might not be compatible with the people upon whom he would force them, Hillary promised to import huge numbers of Muslims. It was luminously stupid politics, but politically she was luminously stupid, so it fit.

It is why she is not President.

She knew that the backward peoples of Flyover Land ought to want hundreds of thousands of Somalis and Pakistanis and who-knew-what to live with, and if they didn’t, she would force them and it didn’t matter because she had big donors and everybody in the media loved her.

However incoherent and ignorant Trump was, the Establishment was determined to elect him. Elect him it did.

Then there is the insularity of the privileged. Its extent is hard to grasp. It worked mightily for the new President. Hillary has probably never been in a Legion hall with, god, that kind of people; if she had, she might be President. Instead she set a trotline for big donors and hung with the rich. They told her, didn’t they, that she couldn’t lose.

These, like her, knew nothing of the lives of most Americans. Has Bill Kristol hitchhiked in the chill of three a.m. on a secondary road in Appalachia, total wealth twenty-five dollars, hoping sparse traffic would get him to Roanoke? I am accepting bets. I doubt that Katie Couric, or any of the babbling bubble heads, has ever worked in a truck stop or gas station for minimum wage, if that. How many have ever baited a hook, had a paper route, or had to decide between a warm coat with winter coming on or paying the cable?

This is why Trump took them by such surprise. They were dealing with a country they had never seen. And didn’t like. Lord only knows what kind of President Trump will make (unless God also is wondering, which I find plausible) but he had the country figured out. Which is positively weird, given that he is a filthy rich New Yorker.

And the media. These too did great work for our new President. All the corporate outlets were furiously against him, apparently assuming that their opprobrium would crush the upstart. Were they not CBS and NBC and the Washington Post, respected news outlets that people would believe and trust?

Well, no, actually.

And so the talking heads chuckled and sneered and utterly underestimated and got handed their ass. They should have registered as lobbyists for the Donald.

The newsies did not understand that they were widely hated. Their obvious slant, often approaching verticality, looked like (and was) hostility to anyone who was willing to consider Trump. The common sentiment in Flyover Land became, “If these bastards don’t like Donald, he must be OK.”

They made him President.

It reminds me of when Bob Brown started Soldier of Fortune magazine, purporting to be a rag for, oh horror, squeak, mercenary soldiers. The media fell into convulsions denouncing him, cough, splutter, how could…. And with every denunciation, circulation went up. Ol’ Bob, he just smile.

But the talking heads couldn’t figure it out. Did they not all agree with each other? Did not all of America hate what they hated?

Well, ah…heh. Urg.

So when he slapped down Megyn Kelly of Fox News, the talking heads exploded with delighted horror. Trump had just screwed himself with women, who would vote en bloc for Hillary. Whatever minute chance he might have had was now dead. Chortle, chortle.

Actual results: 42% of women, and 53% of white women, voted for…oops,  ah…Trump.

Why? An obvious hypothesis is that women think for themselves, and did. Perhaps they thought Megyn, an abrasive plastic Barbie who probably gets more daily maintenance than a 747, was…an abrasive Baribie….

Trump could say to them, to Hillary, the media, the Insular Good, to BLM and the Snowflakes, “Thank you, thank you. I couldn’t have done it without you.” 

Fred Reed (born 1945 in Crumpler, West Virginia) is a writer and former technology columnist for The Washington Times. He has also written for The American Conservative and LewRockwell.com. A former Marine and Vietnam War veteran, Reed is a police writer and an occasional war correspondent. Reed writes weekly columns for the website Fred on Everything. Reed lives in Ajijic, Jalisco, Mexico.

A different "Take" on the Trump Election

Paradigm

1. a framework containing the basic assumptions, ways of thinking, and methodology that are commonly accepted by members of a scientific community.
2. such a cognitive framework shared by members of any discipline or group: 
3. Establishment paradigm - the education, prejudice and politically correct opinions the establishment makes freely available from birth.

In the last six days many Democrats and their supporters worldwide have expressed fear, loathing, despair, over the election of Donald Trump. I  find this fascinating for in all previous elections, the  winners celebrated one or two nights and then began the process of planning how they would  enjoy the spoils of their victory. The losers were despondent for a day or two, but were back to normal within the week vowing to do their political part next time so that they too could be on the winning  side.
In other words, every political election I have ever witnessed has gone back to "business  as usual" within a few days. Partisan supporters on both sides were willing to live with the outcome.
But not this time.

Fully half of the voters in the USA went into the election with only one possible outcome in mind-- the election of Hillary Clinton to the office of president. When it did not happen, public  demonstrations, riots, foul language, declarations of suicide moves to Canada, burning cars, creating   public mayhem resulted.

 I would like to attempt an explanation and it has nothing to do with a preference for either candidate or the policies they advocate.

People like to feel that everything is right with their world and that their vote really does count. The establishment also want to have things right in their world and over time, and with great persistence and lots of money, they have inculcated what I will call a "correct paradigm" which serves their  long term agenda.  A false security is therefore guaranteed for the people, when the process is controlled by the establishment who, in an election put forward and fund candidates on both sides of the political center. Candidates who speak for real change, like Jill Stein of the Green Party are marginalized as un-electable, so that people will only vote for the two approved candidates.

This time round (2016) two candidates of dubious reputation were the options on November the 8th- Hilary Clinton and Donald Trump. Trump, a self declared candidate who the establishment, would not have run, paid for his own campaign and blew the approved Republican candidates out of the race.
The country then was left with only one approved and endorsed candidate and therefore the world, within which many live and have their comfort zone was threatened with instability.  However the people soldiered on, mouthing all the support lines and  assuring each other that no one outside the correct paradigm could possibly win. To do this, they had to skip over Wikileaks and its revelations about Pay for Play and top secret e-mails and corruption profits and package them as "conspiracy theories" that could easily be neutralized once their candidate Hilary Clinton was president. It seems that during an election, people really do not take  criminal accusations seriously.  Any reference to those things by Trump or 1000's of others had to be explained as just politics.

It was ok of course for most of these same people to believe the evil (and possibly true) stories surrounding Trump, because he was outside their paradigm and destined to lose because of the evil he has undoubtedly committed.  So Hilary got off in the minds of Democrat voters as the victim of conspiracy theorists and Trump was condemned as a felon.

However on Tuesday night the world represented by the correct paradigm, was torn from its foundations because the guy who won the election could NOT possibly (to use the rallying cry) "be my president". There was only one acceptable candidate in the race ......and she lost. Many came unhinged; Normally mild mannered gentle people turned into raving foul mouth idiots, abandoning all courtesies and decorum because the unthinkable had happened. Almost as if a nuclear war had come upon them and they had (unfortunately for those who had to listen) lived through it.

Stop for a minute : this situation is a lot more scary than Trump in power. It shows that the conditioning that has inculcated the paradigm has worked. Such people are robots voting for either puppet that is put on the stage, no matter what their track record or their proposed agenda. They have ceased to think things through; they have no appetite for "alternate media" because it researches and proves things that contradict the correct paradigm;  they blindly follow the paradigm which has assured them from birth that it must not be challenged. It is like gravity or the rotation of the earth- one should not  imagine that you can change them. So all hell broke loose in their minds, because their anchor points (MSM, polls, pundits) were wrong in their predictions.

I'll finish with a little story from Canada which demonstrates that the paradigm discriminates not only against what is perceived as"the bad", but also against "the good". Months of sharing this video  entitled the "Case against the Bank of Canada" to my knowledge has produced few vocal or active supporters. The Canadian Government is clearly breaking the law of the land and making everyone pay higher taxes than are required. The idea of borrowing from the country's national bank at 0% simply does not fit inside the correct paradigm .
You would think such an obvious benefit for all Canadians, would compel them to take to the streets and demonstrate their support for this initiative or tweet by thousands on social media.
To my knowledge "Words of support will just not come forth".

So the paradigm I refer to, produces vocal obscenities and violence as with the Americans over a disappointing election, and absolute silence and apathy with Canadians who should be insisting their government abide by the law of the land.

Why? Public opinion resides within the correct paradigm which often produces an unfortunate or unjust result .

The Church of Laodicea ?

“For we dare not make ourselves of the number, or compare ourselves with some that commend themselves: but they measuring themselves by themselves, and comparing themselves among themselves, are not wise.” 2 Corinthians 10:12

Since the first century, Christians have speculated on the historical identity of the churches  mentioned in chapter 3 of the Book of Revelation. As with so many prophetic statements from the  Bible, events are easier to identify looking back than they are looking forward into the future. The prophecies concerning our Lord's crucifixion, burial, resurrection and ascension are an illustration.

However as we move deeper into the 21st century, current events have identified trends which beg for identity from Bible passages that have been examined expectantly for centuries. In saying this, I am aware that the historical record is strewn with mountain top predictions of ominous judgemental events that never occurred. History remembers them in order to mock any one who feels that they may have some insight into the future. Therefore I am aware that I run that risk.

But however it turns out in the actual prophetic calendar, I believe there is value in exposing what the Scripture has to say in principle, and applying it to what we see. We can hold up trends next to the Scripture for comparison, and in doing so be prompted to act in a manner that will preserve us from any judgement that is implied if we do nothing .

Generally, scholars have valued the Letters to the Seven Churches as Christ's revelation of the character of the Church during historical periods known generally as the last days. The Last Days is a term recognized to be all the time between his ascension to heaven after his resurrection and his yet future coming again in Glory. The Lord's admonition to each church is short and not decisive enough to ensure positive identification but there is sufficient detail to prompt comparison to what an individual can see in his own local church and beyond in the Christian world.

Without apology therefore, I contend that the present day evangelical protestant church corresponds tragically to Laodicea. Every church in every age has had its problems and strengths locally, but no where in church history have all the sins of this passage been so general and evident world wide.

First the church, in the west, has withdrawn from the world. It is no longer a player.
No where in Scripture is the Christian church ( the body of believers) ever allowed to have a mountain top mentality. By that phrase, I mean the church is not permitted to withdraw to a safe  place and just put in time. The church is called to be witnesses both to the Gospel of salvation for Sinners and its application---salt and light on the earth. The church is admonished to be in the world but not "of it."  I am persuaded that (1 Peter  5:8  Be sober, be vigilant; because your adversary the devil, as a roaring lion, seeking whom  he may devour.) this verse is to be considered in its spiritual as well as its real life context. Christians can be destroyed by Sin in the mind and they can also be the victims of persecution as we have seen in Africa, India and Syria. The western church knows nothing of this persecution of the body because they have for generations sheltered themselves within the  toleration limits of their society and the confines of their church buildings.....and this at a time when very little can be hidden from public view.

In the past agrarian societies without any form of electronic communication scrutinized only the events of their local neighborhood. They hardly knew what was happening in the next town or county let alone provincially or nationally. Today, everyone is able to be aware of developments on the national and international scene if they so choose. My fear is that the responsibility to take up this  educational challenge is deliberately avoided,  because the more you know, the more you are held responsible for a meaningful response.

The internet and the alternate media are all available constantly on WIFI systems which deliver data  to your telephone. There is no excuse not to know at least in summary, of policies and events that are planned for you. If you cannot do the research yourself, there  are those who have been exercised to  do it for you. We must recognize that to bury one's head in the sand is not a Christian response. Ignorance is no excuse when all around us is a suffering world.
That is not to say that individuals can change the world, but that  should never be an excuse for not speaking up where there are injustices. It is my view that a sovereign God intervenes against Sin in His own time, but if we are individuals, and if we refuse to speak for the weak and down trodden, we will be judged for our silence. The Samaritan stopped to help the injured victim while the publicans and Pharisees passed by on the other side.

Policies implicate us all, for the tax dollars that we pay to governments become the means of financing what we as a nation become responsible for. Consider abortion, which is everywhere among us. Millions of children have been slaughtered by the permissive policies which allow the mother to take the life of the unborn child. Christians are responsible for that position for it has much Biblical support. The womb after all is said and done, is an intensive care unit from conception until birth.

Similarly, foreign policies of western governments seldom make any sense except in terms of the narrow self interest of a select group of insiders. Millions are killed in wars which through the efforts of investigative reporters have been  shown to be more about oil wealth than national security. In fact Americans constantly talk about defending their  freedom, when their 900 bases world wide are platforms for the launching of aggressive military intervention or invisible subterfuge. The historical record for this statement is undeniable and yet Christians pride themselves in the support of their servicemen who carry out these deeds.

The only way this can happen is for Christians to accept the establishment media's justification  and to deliberately ignore the alternate media's reporting of conflicting evidence. Is this done so that son John can proudly wear his uniform without shame? Are Christians to be exempted from the responsibility to speak out against injustices because they deliberately ignore facts that are easily  obtainable from reliable sources? Media that tells lies has forsaken the responsibility to provide  truthful news and has become the propaganda arm of government. Christians who acquiesce in this ignorance have become complicit in the crimes committed. The alternate media has eliminated any  plausible excuse for ignorance.

That said, it's true, that before the internet, pastors and religious leaders use to be able to claim a certain  level of doubt, therefore excusing themselves from commitments to speak out. After all, if they really didn't know and they were so busy visiting their parishioners to find out, they just may have been excused activism. Tax policy comes in here again because western governments have insisted that church leadership remain silent on all social and international issues in order to keep their tax exempt status. In other words, the government has purchased the silence of the churches. Tax the people hard and then provide tax exemptions for religious social clubs who will not exercise the  "Mind of Christ" on behalf of the weak and powerless for fear of losing their church property. So just maybe --pastors and church leaders have hidden behind tax law too .

The effect of course is predictable: Much sermonizing and exposition on the Scriptures that never gets outside the church walls to condemn the oppressors and apply compassion to those who are the weak and powerless victims.

Revelation 3:15-16
I know thy works, that thou art neither cold nor hot: I would thou wert cold or hot.
So then because thou art lukewarm, and neither cold nor hot, I will spue thee out of my mouth.
----The Lord Jesus Christ