January 25th, 2016

Okay, here’s another Trump video you need to watch

Yeah, yeah; Trump Trump Trump Trump Trump.

But I found this the other day, and I need to highlight it and try to give it as much exposure as possible. If you agree, please spread it around, and if you know anyone connected with any of the campaigns or PACs of his opponents, please call it to their attention.

The video tells us a lot about Trump, and I have no idea why his opponents have not highlighted this story and his behavior around it. I will probably write a lot more about the topic, but right now I wanted to get the video up.

It concerns a golf course that Trump built in Scotland. Now, he’s a real estate developer, and a project of that sort virtually always involves a lot of ugly things; that’s just the way it goes. And a person who does that for a living has to be somewhat ruthless in thinking that what he’s creating is worth displacing people. A developer can’t waste a lot of tears on the little people being displaced.

But I’ve never seen anything quite like what Trump tried to do to those little people who stood in his way. He ultimately lost this battle with them, although his golf course was built. Just to give you a little background, these people were not on his land at all, so the building of the project was not in question. He wanted to buy their property, however—despite their refusing to sell—and the reason he wanted these properties was that they were near his golf course and he felt they were spoiling the view.

But it’s the form his fight took that reveal the character of the man. I’m not talking about legal battles, I’m talking about a Trump fusillade of personal insults of a very low nature, and—well, just take a look for yourselves. I can’t imagine how any of the angry blue-collar people who support Trump can watch this and not be at least a bit disturbed. Maybe very disturbed. Actually, I’m not limiting it to blue-collar workers—I think anyone who watches it should be disturbed. I happen to think he looks like a snotty, spoiled child—but hey, that’s just me.

I realize that many many Trump supporters will not be disturbed by the video, however. I believe that they might see this as just an example of how hard he’ll fight for them. Yeah, maybe, if that’s what you think he’s really all about (until you get in his way, that is). Personally, I see him as being about money and power and attempting to crush anyone who gets in his way, as well as lying in order to do the same. That may be a good way to become a successful real estate developer, but it’s a very very dangerous set of traits to have in a president to the degree that Trump exhibits them—it’s a setup for a tyrant.

There are many many videos about this incident on YouTube, nearly all of them taken from a documentary entitled “You’ve Been Trumped” that was made in 2011. The entire film is available at YouTube, as well as much shorter videos. Here, I’ve posted the movie’s trailer first, which is very short (and it’s actually seconds 10-23 that contain the insults from Trump that I find most objectionable), followed by a somewhat longer video that I’ve chosen in order to give you more background. You might want to use the caption function when you watch; the accents can be hard to understand (and I don’t mean Trump’s accent). Even the closed caption function is sometimes a bit confused by them. :

[ADDENDUM: I meant to mention another important thing about this video—in some ways, the most important thing of all. It’s the sort of ammunition the Democrats are saving up to use against Trump in the general if he’s the Republican nominee.There’s tons more where that came from, all of it making him look very bad in the eyes of Independents and Democrats. The video is extremely unlikely to sway his devotees, but that’s not the point.]

64 Responses to “Okay, here’s another Trump video you need to watch”

  1. nkbay99 Says:

    Finally!!! I’ve mentioned this film at least twice in the comments on Trump and no one has even commented. Thank you, neoneocon – this is the sort of stuff that people should have been spreading months ago. This speaks to the REAL Trump. Please, get it distributed as widely as possible.

  2. nkbay99 Says:

    Anyone who is interested should rent the whole film on Netflix

  3. neo-neocon Says:


    Thanks for pointing it out to me. I knew someone had, but I couldn’t remember who.

    I don’t even think I noticed it the first time you mentioned it, and it took me a while to get to it the second time. It’s an amazing story.

    I am working on spreading the word. We’ll see.

    I am also amazed that no opponent has highlighted it. What are they doing instead? Attacking each other?

  4. Eric Says:

    “I am also amazed that no opponent has highlighted it.”

    Recall that this is the same bunch, when gifted with the opportunity to set the record straight and flip the script, instead chose to effectively stipulate that the decision for OIF was a “mistake” on the false premise that the intel was the casus belli, rather than Iraq’s evidential material breach of ceasefire, despite that it’s simple to demonstrate that the decision for OIF was straightforward and evidently correct on the controlling law and policy and determinative facts.

    The Narrative contest for the zeitgeist is basic to setting the frame for the activist game. Are they even playing?

  5. parker Says:

    No footage of the donald screwing the pooch and then setting it on fire. trumpsters will applaud the donald’s business acumen.

  6. notherbob2 Says:

    I don’t have any problem with your showing this video. However, I don’t get that it is conclusive of anything. If you look at the circumstances surrounding any major project that involves lots of money, government or private, you will find the group of locals raising issues in order to participate in the gravy train being supported by other axe-grinders.
    As to the standard of truth-telling required to be President; do you still have your insurance plan and your doctor? Feel safer about Libya now that the film-maker is in jail? This stuff is weak tea.
    By the way, I will probably vote for Carly, so the “Trump supporter” knee-jerk response to my comment would be inappropriate.

  7. parker Says:


    Cruz was very energetic during his Maquoketa appearance. He was confident and as sharp as a well honed blade. Tomorrow Fiorina in Iowa City; then Wednesay, Thursday, Friday, Saturday, Sunday, Monday campaigning for Cruz. Firewall time approaches.

  8. neo-neocon Says:


    I certainly didn’t say it would be “conclusive” to most of Trump’s most fervent supporters, who of course will excuse and/or applaud it.

    I am presenting it as “conclusive,” however, of his contempt for people whose homes he has decided look like eyesores because they don’t share his fabulous, beautiful aesthetic, and it is conclusive of the fact that has has no hesitation to call those working-class people “pigs” and “village idiots” because of it.

    He looks like an elitist snob here. That’s my point. The lies, etc., are just par for his course (pun intended).

  9. boxty Says:

    Does that video have anything to do with illegal immigration? No? Then you won’t convince anyone to vote against Trump with that video.

    The people want meat and you keep trying to feed them veggies. No sale.

  10. expat Says:

    He is an elitist snob. And he thinks golf courses, gambling casinos, and limo parking lots are more important than people. Does anyone want him controlling the EPA?
    Donald should buy a pig farm so he will always have a stall to sleep in.

  11. neo-neocon Says:


    Actually, if you read my blog, I’m very strongly against illegal immigration, as I’ve made clear.

    It’s a complete falsehood—but one the Trump troops wish to perpetuate, for obvious reasons—that Trump is the only one who will be tough on it, or even that he means what he says and can do what he says he can, or that he’s the only one talking about it.

    My toughness on illegal immigration doesn’t make me a Trump supporter. Nor are all Trump supporters supporting him for that reason alone. There is a populist, “he’s for the little man” element to his support that looms quite large.

    You have no idea how many people think that, or support him for that reason.

    This video conveys two things: he lies, and he doesn’t give a rat’s ass about the little people—or anyone—if they get in his way, and his way includes the VIEW from his expensive, luxury property.

    People vote emotionally, and that could engender an emotion that is not pro-Trump, even in some of his supporters (although not the most devoted ones).

    What’s more, right now Trump’s supporters number 1/3 of the Republican Party. Unless none of his opponents ever drop out, that doesn’t win the nomination (I don’t think it wins, mathematically speaking, even if they don’t drop out). It certainly doesn’t win the election. He has to gain in support for that. I don’t see why anyone who doesn’t already support him would start supporting him if they watched this.

  12. Ann Says:

    He looks like an elitist snob here.

    Yeah, but he’s an elitist snob who his supporters think will look out for their interests, so … eh.

    Reminds me of the last line in Some Like It Hot — that “well, nobody’s perfect” from the rich playboy when he learns that the “woman” he loves is a man.

  13. neo-neocon Says:


    As I said, I don’t think ALL his supporters would continue to think this if they saw that. It strikes on a visceral level.

    Nor would it help him gain new ones. And when the Democrats unleash it in the general election—which they undoubtedly will if he’s the nominee—it will hurt him tremendously with Independents and Democrats. I think so, anyway.

    Funny you should mention “Some Like it Hot.” I have a draft of a post all ready to go that makes that exact comparison. I’ve thought it for a long, long time.

  14. neo-neocon Says:

    By the way, there’s more to the story. I will be writing another post about it.

    He built the golf course, but he never did succeed in getting these people to sell, at least as far as I can tell (and I’ve researched it a lot). So, in this case, he fought and lost. What’s more, most of Scotland hates his guts. In addition, he promised 6,000 jobs and delivered 200.

    Promises, schmomises.

  15. neo-neocon Says:

    I added an ADDENDUM to the post, as well as a second video, a much shorter one (it now comes before the longer one).

  16. DNW Says:

    ” neo-neocon Says:
    January 25th, 2016 at 6:00 pm

    By the way, there’s more to the story. I will be writing another post about it.

    He built the golf course, but he never did succeed in getting these people to sell, at least as far as I can tell (and I’ve researched it a lot). So, in this case, he fought and lost. What’s more, most of Scotland hates his guts. In addition, he promised 6,000 jobs and delivered 200.

    Promises, schmomises.”

    I don’t like what I saw there, but I also don’t think that this video will make any Trump supporter think the less of him. They are so pissed off at the Republican establishment that his opportunistic attempt to use Scots’ law to dispossess Scots crofters – a broader and more irrecoverable politically devised “dispossession” being precisely what they are enraged over happening to them here – probably means nothing to them.

    They will remark as to how the people in the documentary look like slobs, how it was their own Scots law that opened up the potential, and how the last of the sympathy deserving Scots emigrated here in 1745.

    Well, no, they won’t say that final part. I would.

    Though as you have pointed out he has been in favor of Kelo as well. However Poletown predated that by some years.


  17. neo-neocon Says:


    I don’t know how many times I have to say it (in addition to here and here)—but I’ll repeat it: I didn’t offer the video with the idea that it would dissuade any significant number of his supporters. It may reach a few, but very few, and in fact NOTHING would reach most of them (he’s right about that), because it’s a fanatic cult for them at this point.

    I am offering it to give more information to people who are on the fence, lukewarm, or undecided. Plus, I am pointing out—as I did in the addendum I added a while ago to the post—that the Democrats will use this sort of clip, and much much more, to keep him from winning if he is nominated.

    Those who think he would win, and who think they’ve seen the arsenal of ammunition the Democrats have against him, have no idea what is waiting.

    That is—unless the conspiracy theorists are right, and he’s a Democrat plant.

  18. Yankee Says:

    When do we beat Scotland at the border? They’re laughing at us, at our stupidity. When Scotland sends its people, they’re not sending their best. They’re bringing haggis. They’re wearing kilts. They’re reivers and horse-thieves. And some, I assume, are good people.

    I would build a great wall, and nobody builds walls better than me, believe me, and I’ll build them very inexpensively, I will build a great, great wall on our northern border. And I will have Scotland pay for that wall.

    I will find — within our military, I will find the Emperor Hadrian or I will find Emperor Antoninus, I will find the right guy.

    Offa’s Dyke? Don’t make me laugh. It’s made of dirt. That’s not quality. Where’s Mercia today? They’re losers. And we need to ban all Danes from coming in until we can figure out what is going on.

  19. Dennis Says:

    Neo said:

    “his contempt for people whose homes he has decided look like eyesores because they don’t share his fabulous, beautiful aesthetic, and it is conclusive of the fact that has has no hesitation to call those working-class people “pigs” and “village idiots” because of it.”

    Hearing Trump trash Mr. Forbes turned my stomach. Early in his campaign he dealt mostly with ideas, speaking truth to power, and shattering political correctness. Now his campaign has degenerated into crude character assassination.

  20. DNW Says:

    ” Those … who think they’ve seen the arsenal of ammunition the Democrats have against him, have no idea what is waiting.’

    I agree with that.

  21. DNW Says:

    “Yankee Says:
    January 25th, 2016 at 7:10 pm …”

    Being a literal minded sort, the layers of irony or metaphor there are too deep for me to fathom. If they are there at all.

  22. geokstr Says:

    I wasn’t even aware that documentaries like this existed, but when the big Trump push started on Breitbart I told his fans that they really didn’t understand the stunning assault he would be under from the Vast Leftwing Conspiracy, which is now pouring over the thousands of hours of videos, articles, TV archives, and interviews looking for everything this man has ever said and done that can possibly be construed, misconstrued, ripped out of context, twisted or made up to put him in a negative light. Once he wins the nomination, they’re going to hit him right between the eyes with oppo ads with him as the star saying all sorts of outrageous and offensive things. They’ll save juiciest ones for September and October, too, and the entire media will attack him as well.

    He may be a billionaire and have lots of lawyers, but the ten thousand leftwing 501c’s have billions too, and they’ve been soaking up the excess activist law graduates for over a generation. The lawsuits from environmental, racial, social justice, feminist and victim groups will stagger him.

    The left fights dirty, and they are well aware that this may be their last chance for a while to import tens of millions of new Democrat voters.

  23. DNW Says:


    Oh … “make them pay for it.” now I get it. Slow on the uptake today.

    Didn’t get any sleep last night

    Nite all …

  24. neo-neocon Says:


    The thing is—the sad thing—the Democrats don’t even have to “misconstrue, rip out of context, twist or make up to put him in a negative light.”

    No need for dirty tricks. No need to even search very hard. It’s all there, and it’s straightforward. His own words and actions indict him. There’s TONS of it.

    I cannot fathom why his Republican opposition has not made use of this. I realize they’re not as media-savvy as Democrats, but really. What does it take?

  25. OldTexan Says:

    I have never cared for Trump or his silly celebrity shows, I can’t stand them. I will vote for Trump without hesitation over any Democrat. I am amazed at the way he plays the media and his appeal to all the folks who can’t stand much of anyone in Washington. I am a Texas and we are not surprised when politicians are weasel, lying snake eyed bastards and those are the good ones we vote back into office. I was fed up with Perry and Cruz before this crazy goat fornication election year got started and I am still sitting on the sidelines without much emotional involvement any particular candidate just to save my heartbeats.

    This crazy thing will play itself out and what most of us see as faults in Trump and Sanders those on the unwashed left and right see as features. I was at a party of mostly conservative Texas and Oklahoma people last Friday night and I was amazed about how many, well educated, lawyer and doctor types are thinking Trump is looking interesting and he seems to have the ability to win over Hilary or Sanders.

    I am in my 70’s and waiting for the grown-ups to show up and do things right. That ain’t gonna happen.

  26. notherbob2 Says:

    Anyone who has owned view property who had neighbors who had rusty cars, rundown outbuildings, junk, etc. in their yards may see this differently. Say you ask local law enforcement to insist that these neighbors obey the law and remove dangerous brush and mend fences and they resist; calling you an elitist snob…how do you respond?
    If you call the police when a neighbor parks a rusty car on the street until it is dusty and the tires are flat – are you an elitist snob?
    Conclusive is a strong word.
    Having said that, I think that this stuff may be effective in getting those who identify with the folks calling him an elite snob, to dislike Trump.

  27. neo-neocon Says:


    This isn’t a suburban neighborhood where there is one neighbor who doesn’t mow his lawn or has a few rusty cars. The documentary makes it clear that this was an out-of-the way, isolated place, till Trump built his golf course, and these people had been living there (small farmers) for many decades peacefully and bothering no one till Trump came along. This was a bunch of people, too, not one outlier. He was the rich interloper.

    Nor were they doing anything the least bit illegal, with brush or anything else, or violating any zoning laws.

    And, to top it all off, if you were a rich interloper coming into a formerly quiet rural area, would you get in the news in order to say they lived “like pigs” and were “village idiots”? And then would you say you would be really really good at working with people and negotiating deals?

    In fact—he lost this battle. So it also cuts into his myth that he’s such a winner.

  28. SteveH Says:

    “No need for dirty tricks. No need to even search very hard. It’s all there, and it’s straightforward.”

    No chance there’s any dirty tricks in a short clip hit piece complete with violin strings at just the right moment a rich man says something mean to a poor defenseless woman? I’m surprised they didn’t get the lady to cry but she got very close. That’s pretty much a staple in the current art form of hit piece documentaries. Just watch any network nightly news program for 5 minutes if you need enlightening.

    But woman crying and a full string orchestra is when they pull out all the stops and leave no doubt its all straight forward good guy vs bad.

  29. neo-neocon Says:


    My point was not about this documentary, it was about all the footage out there of Trump saying various things on this and other topics. So there’s no need to distort or even edit all that much in order to distort reality to make a hit piece. The entire documentary, and the trailer and the other video, are much too long for political ads. You wouldn’t use that. The political ad can just be Trump saying they’re pigs and village idiots, and a little background. No need to show anyone crying. Just as, for example, in the video I put on this blog yesterday—which just uses Trump’s own words or to distort, nothing else—Trump’s own words condemn him.

  30. oldschooltwentysix Says:

    He may have done all that, though at this point everything seems slanted.

    What he also did is to change the zeitgeist in American politics so that important issues actually have come to the fore, and more Americans feel included.

    He says he’s seen the demise, which no one can argue against, and wants to make it better, using his acumen and experience.

    He says he’s evolved in his views.

    Is it fair to judge him as a politician by looking under the hat of a businessman?

    Obama is the one that created Trump and the environment where Trump can thrive, making the office one about celebrity over qualifications. At least Trump brings more to the table than Obama ever did.

    Not a Trump supporter either. At this point can’t support anyone from either side. But his toughness and ability to find the American pulse in these screwy times is perhaps making 2016 the most important year since 1968.

  31. Ann Says:

    I cannot fathom why his Republican opposition has not made use of this.

    Nate Silver at FiveThirtyEight took up this question a week or so ago about why the other candidates aren’t “taking the fight to Trump,” and came up with this:

    There are a lot of reasons for this — including, paradoxically, both resignation to the idea of Trump as the nominee, and conversely, a belief that Trump’s support in national polls won’t translate into winning margins in Iowa and other early voting states. But there’s another dimension to the problem too. It should have been perfectly obvious, but it became clearer to me after spending the past week in Iowa: The campaigns competing against Trump are acting in their own narrow best interests, and not necessarily in the best interest of the Republican Party. …

    So unless the Republican National Committee itself were to buy airtime to run negative ads against Trump, the question is which individual candidates might benefit from doing so. This answer is more complicated than you might think.

    The most important part of the calculation is that if Trump doesn’t win Iowa, Cruz very probably will instead. …

    So what would the other candidates rather have: an overwhelming Cruz win in Iowa or a close finish between Cruz and Trump?

    Rubio, for example, might prefer a close finish. For one thing, if Cruz and Trump almost evenly split their vote, there’s an outside chance that Rubio could win Iowa himself with something like the 25 percent of the vote Mitt Romney got in 2012. …

    What about Chris Christie? Christie’s tough-guy persona might seem perfect for taking on Trump, especially during a debate. But Christie, like Rubio, has largely avoided confronting Trump. That too could reflect a strategic calculation. To win the nomination, Christie will first need a good performance in New Hampshire. Then he’ll hope to survive until the latter half of the nomination process, when lots of delegate-rich (and often winner-take-all or winner-take-most) blue and purple states vote. He’s playing a long game, in other words, and he might not mind some Trump-induced chaos in the short run if it prevents Cruz or some other candidate from slingshotting to victory.

    There’s more of that sort of inside-baseball speculation at the link.

  32. neo-neocon Says:


    Actually, I understand why most of the candidates wouldn’t do it. I didn’t necessarily mean them.

    I mean Cruz, for example.

    And I mean the people with money who don’t want Trump. For example, the PAC that made the ad I highlighted yesterday, the PAC run by Katie Packer. Or some PAC run by people who are allies of the National Review people. That’s what I mean by his Republican opposition. That’s why I wrote that, rather than his Republican opponents.

  33. PatD Says:

    Understanding Trump:


  34. neo-neocon Says:


    Yes, it’s completely fair to judge someone as exactly what he’s been all his life.

    Trump has been a businessman, but not your average businessman who has a store on the corner. He’s a big, big mover and shaker and has always been mega-involved in power and power politics, and thrown his money around politically to gain favors. Not only that, but he’s either been running for president or other high office or floating out the idea since the 1980s. Take a look at his lengthy political career, or career attempts, or involvement in politics. It’s YUGE!

    You know why you don’t have videotapes of most businessmen talking at such length, over and over, for many decades, on political issues, and yet you have them of Trump? Because Trump has been heavily involved in politics for all that time, that’s why.

    Even as a private citizen, since when do people get a pass on their previous politics if they were basically politically whoring themselves out for money? I really don’t get it. Either he meant what he said then, and has changed (but can’t articulate how or why, and doesn’t seem to have changed on much of it, either), and changed rather recently, or he’s lying now. Why on earth would I support someone like that, when there are people of integrity and constancy who are running?

    And no, he didn’t change the zeitgeist. He’s doing the populist demagogue thing. It’s old as the hills.

  35. The Other Chuck Says:

    For every hit piece like the Scot video, Trump will roll out something like this with much more immediacy:

  36. neo-neocon Says:

    The Other Chuck:

    I have to say I fail to see your point.

    Is it that Trump will respond to things he perceives as attacks and criticisms?

    So what? I certainly don’t think there’s a thinking human being who would imagine he wouldn’t respond in some way, perhaps many ways.

  37. J.J. Says:

    PatD, thanks for the link. I think Duke has pretty much broken the code.

    Many of us here are more into the logic and reasoning of the issues at hand. As an analogy: We don’t buy the sizzle and smell. We want to know if the steak is grass fed, anti-biotic free, and butchered in proper sanitary conditions. Trump is using classical Madison Avenue techniques to mesmerize those who are hungry and can be attracted by just the sizzle and the smell.

    I’ve decided that we are following Argentina’s path to bankruptcy and social decay. With Michael Bloomberg’s possible decision to run as an independent, and if Sanders wins the democrat nomination, we are possibly looking at a race between two billionaires and a Bolshevik. If that isn’t a picture of a Banana Republic, I don’t know what is.

    At this point I am still hopeful that we can elect someone who will lead us on a path to smaller government, fiscal conservatism, and greater national security. I don’t see that man/woman among the candidates, but am still hoping for the best. I do know this: I am ashamed of the legacy my generation is passing on to our children. We should have done better. For that reason I will stay engaged until I can do no more.

  38. The Other Chuck Says:

    The point is that Trump is appealing emotionally to a wounded country. Millions and millions of high paying industrial jobs lost during the last 20 years – never to come back. And a country club, gentry Republican establishment that wants more H1B visas and doesn’t give a damn about millions of illegals taking the paltry low paying jobs that are left. Millions of people who lost their homes in the 2008 real estate collapse, and millions more living under bridges, begging and stealing to survive. Nearly 50 million receiving food stamps. The highest prison population in the world partly the result of hopeless ghettos and lack of jobs. All this as we are about to enter another recession.

    Put up all the hit pieces, unflattering photos, crying Scots you want, and it won’t make a bit of difference, even in the general election.

    This is Germany 1921. (I won’t make the comparison, but you know what I’m thinking.)

  39. neo-neocon Says:

    The Other Chuck:

    I really don’t understand this feeling that Trump is invincible in the general. In fact, I don’t even understand why people think he has a good chance of winning in the general, and certainly not a better chance than the other GOP candidates. As I’ve said (and demonstrated) time and again, he does worse than the other candidates in polls, and is usually beaten by Hillary and Sanders and Biden in head-to-heads. And that’s without videos like this being known at all.

    The Democrats have the goods on him, and the goods are numerous. He already has the highest unfavorables and “will not vote for” responses of any candidate. So why on earth would he be so invincible?

    He is invincible with, at most, 1/3 of the people who say they will vote in the Republican primaries. No video will convince most of that devoted 1/3 (as I’ve said time and again in this thread) to turn on him. It’s irrelevant, because that’s a relatively small group. Other people will see this—or any number of other things he’s done—and cringe. They’re already cringing, even without seeing this.

    Why is that so difficult to understand?

    Of course, he could gain support and win. But he is the most vulnerable GOP candidate of all. He has the most skeletons. He is the most distasteful person. He is disliked the most. His supporters are extraordinarily fervent about him, but no one else is—except, I suppose, a huge number of people fervently against him.

    By the way, Hitler only got around a third of the German vote. He got power because of the nature of the Parliamentary system, plus his own tyrannical machinations. Nazism, despite all the travail that Germany had gone through after WWII, never was approved of by a German majority till AFTER Hitler got power and elections were no longer free.

  40. Cornhead Says:

    Neo’s addendum is critical. I’ve been posting here and in the comments section of Power Line that there is a ton of dirt and oppo research on Trump. The Dems can micro-target the right voters with Big Data. It will be a landslide for the Dems.

    I saw Carly in CB tonight. Trump came up. I made the above point.

  41. Cornhead Says:

    I should add I made this same point in my submission to Power Line and that was before I saw Neo’s addendum. My example is that Trump is a big cheater in playing golf.

    Do people realize that in every BK people lose money?

    Can any building in NYC be built without the Mob being paid off? There are alleged Mafia dealings with Trump.

  42. The Other Chuck Says:

    You are right that the current polls indicate Trump is not a shoe in for the general election. That’s because he is targeting for the primaries. When, if, he wins the nomination he will target disaffected Democrats and independents.

    I’ve never been more concerned about an election than this year. There is a perfect storm brewing in the economy, and with the problems I listed above it could spell disaster.

    Here is a very disquieting piece at zerohedge.com centered around Trump’s 1990 Playboy interview. Here is Mr. Krieger’s pertinent remarks:
    Personally, I’m far more concerned about how he would deal with domestic dissent.

    To that end, I think one thing is clear. I think he’d take George W. Bush’s “you are either with us, or you are with the terrorists” and change it to something like “you are either with me, or you hate America.” In a collapsed economy, this sort of slogan could appeal to a lot of people, and with an outraged public behind him, President Trump has the capacity to be incredibly cruel and vicious to American citizens he think stand in the way of his “Making America Great.”

    Without any obvious respect for the Constitution or Bill of Rights, a President Trump could very quickly transform himself into a very dangerous strongman, all the while believing that he is merely doing what is necessary to make America great.

    The article is chilling. Read the whole thing.


  43. The Other Chuck Says:

    Neo, your last point about Hitler getting elected with 1/3 of the popular vote is NOT comforting. Should Bloomberg enter the race, Trump could actually get elected in the House.

  44. neo-neocon Says:

    The Other Chuck:

    I can’t say I meant it to be comforting.

    But there’s also the Electoral College, which could make it interesting in a 3-way race. I actually don’t think that Bloomberg will enter.

    Also, Hitler didn’t get elected with 1/3 of the vote. It was a parliamentary system, and that election made the Nazis the largest party but a coalition needed to be formed to govern. Von Hindenburg actually had won the presidency and was the head of the government, but Hitler later became Fuhrer through a series of appointments and backroom deals (and Hindenburg’s death) that were very Byzantine. It’s a complex and fascinating and blood-curdling story (see this).

    I have never been so disturbed and frightened by the prospects in an election, and that includes 2012. As for the article you recommend, I know just from the excerpts that it sounds like the sort of thing I’ve been thinking. I think Trump has the potential to be more dangerous than Obama was or Hillary, or certainly as dangerous. Obama unlocked the door of something in this country that heretofore had always been in check (but as I said before, it couldn’t have happened without the electorate approving).

  45. Beverly Says:

    Well, it certainly turned me off Trump (tho Cruz is my man, as I’ve said).

    Cry, the beloved country. We lost her in 2008.

  46. The Other Chuck Says:

    Hm, Byzantine backroom deals. Let’s hope it never gets to the place where any deals can be made.

  47. Cornhead Says:

    Regarding neo’s comment about Trump and “the little people” I am reminded of my discussion with a blue collar guy from LeMars when I saw Trump in Sioux City. I asked the guy why he supported Trump and he said that Trump was “exactly like me.” As a lawyer and knowing how Trump lives and operates, I thought to myself that this poor guy had no clue.

  48. Cornhead Says:

    One of my favorite Trump stories is about a Wall Street analyst who predicted the BK of one of his casino companies. That is a bold call. Trump sues the guy for his OPINION.

    Turns out the guy was right and it happened quickly. Guy’s employer gets pressured by Trump. Guy gets fired. Guy sues Trump. Trump settles. Pathetic.

    What will Trump do with the IRS, FBI and ATF at his disposal?

  49. rexxous Says:

    My first impression of the trailer: Wow, the soaring music, the windy landscapes, the fowls in the sky – typical garbage techniques used by the kind of environmental nutburgers seen all over PBS and BBC. And the guy who says the local environment is comparable to the Amazon…huh??? Jeez, typical exaggeration by these nuts. Anyone with a knowledge of biology can easily point out that the number of species in a warm wet rainforest is many orders of magnitude greater than in cold wintry Scotland. Give me a break. The kind of idiots who are persuaded by this type of propaganda are not going to be Trump voters anyway. The soaring music is the key. If they have the facts on their side, they present them. If not, you get emotional people presenting disjointed versions of their side of the story – soundbites not substance – and… yes, soaring music. The latter is a giveaway every time.

    I’m surprised they didn’t blame him for global climate change while they were at it. That’s what these kitchen sinkers typically do.

  50. ErisGuy Says:

    Oh, yeah. Washington wants to be king; Lincoln is tyrant; FDR wants to be Mussolini; Nixon wants to be king; Obama will suspend the elections; Trump will be tyrant….

    Heard it all before. Never right.

  51. ErisGuy Says:

    Hitler later became Fuhrer through a series of appointments and backroom deals that were very Byzantine

    Which was, of course, how Bruning, Papen and Schleicher became chancellors as well.

  52. ErisGuy Says:

    I am in my 70’s and waiting for the grown-ups to show up and do things right.

    Dole, McCain, Romney had their chances. My guess is Dole, McCain, Romney will endorse another stooge, who will promptly lose to Clinton. Rubio, maybe?

  53. Orson Says:

    I can’t imagine how any of the angry blue-collar people who support Trump can watch this and not be at least a bit disturbed. Maybe very disturbed.

    Why do you think real Americans seek security? They support the “blue collar” billionaire because they seek opportunity – not the cement boots of Obamunism.

  54. Orson Says:

    And no, he didn’t change the zeitgeist. He’s doing the populist demagogue thing. It’s old as the hills.

    And I hear an ‘I’m above ALL THAT’ elitism in your remark.

    The “[Trump] didn’t change the zeitgeist” quip means “I don’t know what I’m I’m talking about” because “I’m in denial” of what’s happened already, and what’s evident in your own pages here.


    SURE – I’d love to find someone who makes me feel more assured, but if you can’t find another who can tap into the mind of the times, is it always demagoguery?

    Isn’t democracy the rule by the demos, anyway? And hasn’t our republic been shattered already?

    I’m cynical and resigned enough to accept that nothing better than Trump is possible today.

  55. The Other Chuck Says:

    ErisGuy, Trump IS a tyrant – in the business world. It isn’t a stretch to see him acting the same way as president.

  56. Baklava Says:


    I have only ONE requirement.

    Which candidate will do the most to advance conservative ideas?

    People used the same argument to elect Ahnold in CA – as they are using for Trump. He’s the guy who can win they say.

    Look where that got CA. A lower percentage of people registered as Republicans and LESS people understanding what conservatism is about here. CA has the highest poverty rate and the lowest education and they’ll keep voting Democrat now because Ahnold never provided people with an articulation of conservatism.

    Trump can’t articulate anything but name calling. And will he change as President? No. He will always be the crass non-articulating inarticulate person who can’t advance conservative ideas.

    In the next debate you’ll see. His arguments are:
    1) I’m up in the polls
    2) People know it’s true – China/or whatever country is beating us

    When will he EVER or when has he EVER advanced a conservative thought?

  57. geokstr Says:

    Neo: The thing is—the sad thing—the Democrats don’t even have to “misconstrue, rip out of context, twist or make up to put him in a negative light.”

    Note I started my statement with “construed”, the things they could use in a relatively honest oppo ad, like the videos you presented. However, this election is critical to get amnesty for illegals in the near future and they know it. Besides, they will fight dirty anyway because (I paraphrase):

    “The left can’t be bargained with. It can’t be reasoned with. It doesn’t feel pity, or remorse, or fear. You still don’t get it, do you? That’s what they do. That’s all they do! You can’t stop them! And they absolutely will not stop, ever, until you are dead.”

  58. J.J. Says:

    rexous: “My first impression of the trailer: Wow, the soaring music, the windy landscapes, the fowls in the sky – typical garbage techniques used by the kind of environmental nutburgers seen all over PBS and BBC.”

    My impression exactly. This is the typical work of those who favor Agenda 21. What you don’t see is that when the time is right, the enviros will kick the locals off the land because their desire is to see no human activities on “wild lands.” But they especially hate golf courses. They also hate farmers and ranchers, but not as much as golf course builders.

    That’s not to say that the Donald didn’t make some asinine comments in his typical high school bully manner. That, IMO, is his Achilles heel, unless the emotions of voters can brush that off as not important. We’ll soon see. The voting starts Feb. 1st.

  59. neo-neocon Says:


    Yeah, I’m so elitist that I defended Sarah Palin over and over and over against those who actually were.

    Also, my remark about populist demagoguery on the part of Trump was in response to your comment that he CHANGED the zeitgeist; I was pointing out that what he did was no change.

    No, I detest Trump for quite a few reasons—and I’ve described most of them—and not a single one has to do with any sort of elitist preference. I do value things like integrity and honor in a human being, and as well as reason. If that’s “elitist” to you, so be it. And if you don’t know how to recognize a demagogue when you see one, I can’t help you with that.

  60. neo-neocon Says:


    Rubio has consistently done better than every single other Republican in all the polls in a hypothetical run against Clinton, and that’s been true for many months.

    You may hate him (despite the fact that, except for immigration, he has been consistently conservative) anyway. But all the evidence points to him doing the best against Clinton and all the other Democrats who might run.

  61. neo-neocon Says:


    Yes, the documentary itself is typical in that way, and I’m assuming the guy who made it has a basically leftist perspective.

    Environmental groups fought what Trump did. Ironically, he used similar arguments against a later wind farm project that he thought would run the golf course’s view, and he sued.

    At any rate, I wasn’t saying that the documentary itself would be something the opposition should use against Trump, although it would certainly work that way in the general for the Democrats, because of the environmental angle. I’m just talking about his insulting remarks about the people who wouldn’t sell to him. Those would be the things for his Republican opponents to highlight during the primaries.

  62. blert Says:

    Scott Adams is making the argument that America has reverted to nearly a pure democracy — via social media and the Internet.

    This year marks the beginning of twitter-campaigns — real time snark — all the time.

    I can’t favor Trump for one reason — it’s my deal breaker — he’ll lose to the Democrat in November.

    He doesn’t even figure to prevail in a brokered Republican convention.

    He’s got just TOO much baggage.


    I’m convinced that the MSM LOVES Trump in the pole position.

    The MSM HATES both Cruz and Rubio — and Carson — all three are WAY too Christian for those atheists.

    The GOPe THINKS it can tolerate a corruptocrat — and with either Trump or Hillary the corruption will roll on.

    Dole is plainly happy to see the GOP lose to Hillary… rather than see Cruz win. The latter is what terrifies him.

    Cruz totally freaks them out. He’s more on target than even Rubio.

    Rubio almost got rolled during the Gang of Eight fiasco.

    As the first Latino President — Ted Cruz would pull more than a few Latino voters to his camp.

    Whereas, the Mexican factions will pull out ALL the stops to derail Trump.

    They are sure to be a VERY significant sector of the vote — and I just can’t imagine Trump NOT losing Florida and other southern states — all of which he’d need to have any chance in November.

    My experience in Honolulu, Hawaii is that ethnic blocs vote en masse — and very steady, too.

    It’s an identity vote. Policy, law, tradition — in the American sense — mean nothing.

    Community leaders select their choice — and then the entire super clan votes as one.

    So it’s extremely significant that Trump has no meaningful chance to attract Mexican or Latino support.

    The MSM is running Trump up the flag pole strictly for laughs and giggles.

    Then the guns will come out — and he’ll be shot up something terrible.

    What we’re seeing is a concerted surge to stop limited government.

    Bush, Christie — and the rest — are de facto sabotaging America’s best hope for getting back to first principles — before the Democrats Cloward Piven this nation into the ground.

  63. neo-neocon Says:


    I totally agree with you about the MSM and Trump.

    Good for ratings.

    Good for the Democrats.

    It’s win-win for the MSM.

    And I can’t believe how many people on the right are falling for it. I feel as though I’m watching a slow-motion tragedy unfold—and this time I blame the voters on the right.

    I hope this feeling of dread is misplaced.

  64. Oldflyer Says:

    Lord. The Trump apologists are simply amazing. How can they follow a filthy rich man who was born with a silver spoon in his mouth, and added to his wealth by gaming the bankruptcy laws (4 times–that is not normal), and making deals that frequently hurt little people, as though he were the Pied Piper.? Well, we know what happened to those who did follow the mythical Pied Piper.

    There are some rather silly analogies expressed here. One is comparing the Scottish situation to blighted neighborhoods. Hey, that was farm land. It was farm land when Trump cast his eye on it. Reminds me of the fools who move next to airports, and then moan about the noise. Farms have certain characteristics; airports have certain characteristics. Oh, and Trump has certain characteristics as well. You avoid the characteristics you don’t like; you don’t try to change their character.

About Me

Previously a lifelong Democrat, born in New York and living in New England, surrounded by liberals on all sides, I've found myself slowly but surely leaving the fold and becoming that dread thing: a neocon.

Monthly Archives


Ace (bold)
AmericanDigest (writer’s digest)
AmericanThinker (thought full)
Anchoress (first things first)
AnnAlthouse (more than law)
AtlasShrugs (fearless)
AugeanStables (historian’s task)
Baldilocks (outspoken)
Barcepundit (theBrainInSpain)
Beldar (Texas lawman)
BelmontClub (deep thoughts)
Betsy’sPage (teach)
Bookworm (writingReader)
Breitbart (big)
ChicagoBoyz (boyz will be)
Contentions (CommentaryBlog)
DanielInVenezuela (against tyranny)
DeanEsmay (conservative liberal)
Donklephant (political chimera)
Dr.Helen (rights of man)
Dr.Sanity (thinking shrink)
DreamsToLightening (Asher)
EdDriscoll (market liberal)
Fausta’sBlog (opinionated)
GayPatriot (self-explanatory)
HadEnoughTherapy? (yep)
HotAir (a roomful)
InFromTheCold (once a spook)
InstaPundit (the hub)
JawaReport (the doctor is Rusty)
LegalInsurrection (law prof)
RedState (conservative)
Maggie’sFarm (centrist commune)
MelaniePhillips (formidable)
MerylYourish (centrist)
MichaelTotten (globetrotter)
MichaelYon (War Zones)
Michelle Malkin (clarion pen)
Michelle Obama's Mirror (reflections)
MudvilleGazette (milblog central)
NoPasaran! (behind French facade)
NormanGeras (principled leftist)
OneCosmos (Gagdad Bob’s blog)
PJMedia (comprehensive)
PointOfNoReturn (Jewish refugees)
Powerline (foursight)
ProteinWisdom (wiseguy)
QandO (neolibertarian)
RachelLucas (in Italy)
RogerL.Simon (PJ guy)
SecondDraft (be the judge)
SeekerBlog (inquiring minds)
SisterToldjah (she said)
Sisu (commentary plus cats)
Spengler (Goldman)
TheDoctorIsIn (indeed)
Tigerhawk (eclectic talk)
VictorDavisHanson (prof)
Vodkapundit (drinker-thinker)
Volokh (lawblog)
Zombie (alive)

Regent Badge