- The American Conservative - https://www.theamericanconservative.com -

Trump To Davos Manor

Goodbye, Breitbart Embassy [1] — and hello Davos Manor! The Washington Post observes: [2]

About this time last year, Breitbart News eulogized the World Economic Forum [3]. The annual gathering of global elites in Davos, Switzerland would be a “somber occasion,” the far-right outlet wrote, because “their influence on the global stage is waning rapidly” in the wake of Brexit and Donald Trump’s election victory.

That reckoning just came home to roost. Stephen K. Bannon — who last year was busy setting up a forward operating base in Trump’s inner sanctum for Breitbart’s brand of economic nationalism — suffered further debasement Tuesday from his feud with the president by losing his job running Breitbart itself. Meanwhile, the White House confirmed that President Trump will be heading to Davos in two weeks, the first U.S. president to attend the conference since Bill Clinton.

And if the thought of Trump rubbing shoulders with world leaders, financial giants and media mandarins in the literally rarefied air of the Swiss Alps wasn’t enough to turn the stomachs of the MAGA crowd, the White House offered them another emetic on Tuesday.

The president presided over a 90-minute meeting, more than half of it before television cameras, with lawmakers from both parties during which he pledged to pursue a comprehensive immigration breakthrough, saying he wants a “bill of love.” There wasn’t much chest-thumping about building a border wall. “I think my positions are going to be what the people in this room come up with,” Trump said. “I am very much reliant on the people in this room.”

Tucker Carlson ripped into the president over this on his show last night. [4]Excerpt:

Congress is full of people from both parties who believe that the point of our immigration policy is to provide cheap labor to their donors and to atone for America’s imaginary sins against the world. They couldn’t care less about immigration’s effect on you or your family–these are the same people the president now says he trusts to write the immigration bill, the one he will sign no matter what it says. So what was the point of running for president?



Being a Trump voter isn’t always easy, it’s like rooting for the underdog in baseball, the old Chicago Cubs. On one level there is pride, the pride that comes from doing something that fashionable people consider insane, and that’s a good feeling. But there’s also some disappointment along the way and honestly, there is some embarrassment. But you silently bear it because you know that when they finally win the World Series it will be worth everything you went through. Every sarcastic dig from your brother-in-law at Thanksgiving will seem small by comparison. In the Trump presidency, the World Series is this immigration bill. It’s the big payoff, the whole point of the exercise, and they’re not allowed to blow it.

It’s almost like George Orwell has been Michael Wolffing his way around the White House lately:

He had only one criticism, he said, to make of Mr. Pilkington’s excellent and neighbourly speech. Mr. Pilkington had referred throughout to “Animal Farm.” He could not of course know-for he, Napoleon, was only now for the first time announcing it-that the name “Animal Farm” had been abolished. Henceforward the farm was to be known as “The Manor Farm”-which, he believed, was its correct and original name.

“Gentlemen,” concluded Napoleon, “I will give you the same toast as before, but in a different form. Fill your glasses to the brim. Gentlemen, here is my toast: To the prosperity of The Manor Farm! ”

There was the same hearty cheering as before, and the mugs were emptied to the dregs. But as the animals outside gazed at the scene, it seemed to them that some strange thing was happening. What was it that had altered in the faces of the pigs? Clover’s old dim eyes flitted from one face to another. Some of them had five chins, some had four, some had three. But what was it that seemed to be melting and changing? Then, the applause having come to an end, the company took up their cards and continued the game that had been interrupted, and the animals crept silently away.

But they had not gone twenty yards when they stopped short. An uproar of voices was coming from the farmhouse. They rushed back and looked through the window again. Yes, a violent quarrel was in progress. There were shoutings, bangings on the table, sharp suspicious glances, furious denials. The source of the trouble appeared to be that Napoleon and Mr. Pilkington had each played an ace of spades simultaneously.

Twelve voices were shouting in anger, and they were all alike. No question, now, what had happened to the faces of the pigs. The creatures outside looked from pig to man, and from man to pig, and from pig to man again; but already it was impossible to say which was which.


90 Comments (Open | Close)

90 Comments To "Trump To Davos Manor"

#1 Comment By Brother Padilla On January 10, 2018 @ 8:37 pm

Well, shut my mouth and call me Cornbread.

#2 Comment By Intelliwriter On January 10, 2018 @ 8:46 pm

Why do I get the distinct feeling that, while Trump is dining on well-done steak with ketchup and a Diet Coke, and rubbing elbows with the richest of the rich, he’ll forget all about the forgotten men and women who voted for him.

#3 Comment By Siarlys Jenkins On January 10, 2018 @ 9:00 pm

The 0.1% do not love Trump.

Right, and neither do the Hollywood sheiks, but, the next 9.9 percent love Trump.

#4 Comment By Hound of Ulster On January 10, 2018 @ 9:14 pm

Noah172 has gone total ‘I reject your reality and substitute my own’ in response to this.

Judging by the hodgepodge that Trump put forward in the big immigration meeting, I highly doubt he do anything at Davos other than rolling over and showing his belly to the Chinese.

If he was serious about ANY of his promises, where are the bills to be voted on?

#5 Comment By Noah172 On January 10, 2018 @ 9:29 pm

Ark712 wrote:

I think Noah is losing it.

I think you are incapable of a substantive reply.

Lots and lots of denials, back tracking and goal shifting.

Nope, that’s not what my comments here say.

Bannon is out

Because of his own foolish behavior.

Trump hasn’t released his tax returns, but is open about everything

Non sequitur. And you didn’t respond to the point I made about Trump’s financial disclosure forms in the other thread. I even gave you a link to them.

#6 Comment By Fran Macadam On January 10, 2018 @ 9:41 pm

All I can says is, this has to be the nastiest insider political power struggle in U.S. Within living memory.

#7 Comment By Q On January 10, 2018 @ 9:43 pm

Really, it’s like someone switched his meds.

#8 Comment By Jen On January 11, 2018 @ 12:23 am

Your commenter Noah172 is a perfect example of how Trump can do or say anything he wants, and his slack-jawed, rapt base will find some way to excuse it. Don’t delude yourself that his going to Davos will alieniate the MAGA crowd.

#9 Comment By St Louisan On January 11, 2018 @ 12:46 am

“Let’s see if any of the Trump haters has the integrity to respond to my 4:11 comment on Politico’s report that Trump is going to Davos to give a populist speech — and that (according to Politico) the World Economic Forum did not invite Trump specifically, and was just hoping to get maybe a Cabinet member at most.”

Well I’m don’t hate Pres Trump, I’m just disappointed in him, but I’ll respond–

If he does that, then great. But will this barnstorming populism affect actual policy anytime soon? Will any part of the Trump ’16 platform that the Wall Street Journal editorial board doesn’t approve of be implemented soon? When there actually is a wall, or an infrastructure bill, or an improved health care plan, or any effort to reverse the trade deficit, then you can crow.

#10 Comment By Chester Middleton On January 11, 2018 @ 1:06 am

“..What would he have to do to get you to sneer at him? — RD]”

Besides announcing that he’s a Democrat again? If we review the comments in the Roy Moore articles, it would appear that nothing short of that sin is unforgivable.

#11 Comment By Yadadamean On January 11, 2018 @ 1:40 am

Can we wait until Trump sells out on amnesty before we accuse him of selling out on amnesty? He’s been doing this back-and-forth between his base and the Dems for about a year now. People need to stop pretending it’s a foregone conclusion. The only reason they currently do is to fit the CW that the guy’s voters are rubes who were duped, and that there were no tradeoffs involved in voting against him. Same goes for this idea that all regular-GOP are necessarily at odds with Trumpism — you can argue it’s too small, but his core voters are getting a tax cut, outside of the poorest who are exempt from federal taxes.

V profound and insightful literary analogy at the end, BTW. Deep stuff.

#12 Comment By I Don’t Matter On January 11, 2018 @ 7:52 am

Noah172, I bet Trump will not deliver any sort of a firebrand speech that makes anyone in the room uncomfortable. He is a wimpering coward who has never ever gone after anyone with any power face-to-face. He is always eager to please those in the room whose approval he craves, and – just a hunch – you and I aren’t on the list. But Obama, Xi, Putin, May, etc. are.

#13 Comment By Professor Nerd On January 11, 2018 @ 8:32 am

@Robert E.
Exactly. Where is Tucker’s bowtie now that he is the voice of “middle America”? I wonder if he has ever been to Ohio?

#14 Comment By Noah172 On January 11, 2018 @ 8:48 am

St Louisan:

See here:


#15 Comment By Noah172 On January 11, 2018 @ 8:56 am


– There is a big wealth and income difference between the 0.1% and the next 9.9. The former group is much more politically, economically, and culturally influential.

– It is debatable that the next 9.9 “love” Trump as you claim. The 2016 exit poll had Trump and Clinton about tied among incomes 200k and up (roughly the starting point of the top 10%). Trump did worse than Romney in affluent enclaves all over the country, and Clinton won most of the top 10%-er neighborhoods (which tend to be in liberal cities and their inner-ring suburbs). Also, Clinton far outpaced Trump in “hard money” donations of, say, $2000 and up — the kind of donations that the next 9.9 people make (the 0.1 people drop millions on super PACs).

Address the evidence, not your narrative.

#16 Comment By Michelle On January 11, 2018 @ 9:28 am

Well Noah, I read the Politico article and it was mostly speculation. Plus, it included a Larry Kudlow quote asserting that Trump’s NATO speech got members to “pony up.” No, it didn’t. Members agreed in 2014 to up their military spending to two percent of GDP by 2024. Some are farther along than others. Yet Trump, who seems to think members pay directly to the US, is touting this as his victory. Another lie.

So yeah, not all that impressed with the Politico puff piece though I certainly wouldn’t put it past Trump to mouth populist platitudes while world leaders roll their eyes. Looking tough while remaining substance-free is what he does.

But kudos to you Noah for pulling out all the stops in your never-ending rationalization of Trump’s behavior. You really need to apply for Kellyanne Conway’s job because you’re far better at it than she is.

#17 Comment By mrscracker On January 11, 2018 @ 9:39 am

Intelliwriter says:

Why do I get the distinct feeling that, while Trump is dining on well-done steak with ketchup and a Diet Coke, and rubbing elbows with the richest of the rich, he’ll forget all about the forgotten men and women who voted for him.”
Well, at least in that case he’ll be eating the way they do & not attempting to be someone he’s not.
Most older people I’ve known ate their steaks well done or country fried. And there’s nothing wrong about ketchup or Diet Coke.
Donald Trump isn’t my hero, but I appreciate his lack of pretension in this respect.

#18 Comment By CharleyCarp On January 11, 2018 @ 10:21 am

I don’t expect a barnburner, but wouldn’t be surprised in Trump read a Miller-drafted statement in Davos, telling everyone to think of the forgotten people. It will be weak, but more than enough for our friend Noah.

Are the Davos-elite capable of the submissive adulation that wins Trump over? I think not, so while they’ll have a real opportunity to play to his vanity, and get some rhetorical concessions, (a) they’ll blow their chance and (b) it wouldn’t matter anyway, since, as Chait pointed out the other day, the President doesn’t actually speak for his Administration.

I think Noah is partially right about the politics of DACA, but I think will end up having been ultimately wrong. Yes, the votes at stake aren’t swing voters, but one thing we’ve learned is that voter swings are significant sometimes, and not other times. It’s probably more important to get passionate people to the polls. The folks truly passionate about restricting immigration turned out in droves in 2016, finally having someone to vote for. Those passionate the other way, imo, were less pumped up about HRC (and wouldn’t tend to be single-issue voters anyway). House races in 2018 may be different in particular places. We’ll see.

#19 Comment By ALM On January 11, 2018 @ 10:32 am

@John Gruskos

America will NEVER embrace Buchananist nationalism. EVER. Simply accept reality at face value on this and move on with your life. You will be happier for it.


No matter how hard you try to deny it, the reality is that Trump was NEVER planning to “embrace” or even entertain economic nationalism, especially since he and billionaires like him benefit the most form the current system. No amount of the working class’s opposition the the current economic system will matter if they can’t count on the support of insiders within the regime.

#20 Comment By JoS. S. Laughon On January 11, 2018 @ 11:46 am

Jumped on just to see Noah172’s attempt at justification. Whew boy.

Why extend to this man such credibility? Why so credulous? Is it the adultery or failed business relationships that make him such a paragon of trust?

#21 Comment By amhixson On January 11, 2018 @ 11:46 am


Be honest. There’s no amount or source of evidence that will ever convince you of Trump’s incompetence, sadism, and narcissism. You’re not a level-headed, rational third-party observer free of bias and ideological blindspots. You’re a Trump zealot–a to-the-bitter-end partisan. You’ve anointed him your Napoleon Bonaparte, your savior, and you’ll stick with him all the way to the end. Should Mueller take him down, you will, regardless of the preponderance or veracity of the evidence, proclaim Trump a martyr to the “one, true cause” and become his apologist.

Stop insulting our intelligence by pretending otherwise.

What’s sad is you’re clearly not unintelligent and yet you’ve chosen a messiah so obviously unworthy of devotion and defense.

#22 Comment By MikeCA On January 11, 2018 @ 12:09 pm

Devoted Trumpistas will never abandon him- to do so would be to admit they were wrong about him and like Trump they will never admit to being wrong. Hopefully those who were lukewarm in their support (and I think many Trump voters were )will re-evaluate their continued alliance. The irony is that almost all of Trump’s problems are self inflicted – the Democrats/left have been largely unable to damage him among his voters. Unfortunately when he goes down he will take the GOP with him. As much as I disagree with most Republican positions we need more than one strong political party,one party rule isn’t healthy for democracy. I love pizza and could eat it every day but I wouldn’t have a balanced diet nor would I likely be too healthy.

#23 Comment By Noah172 On January 11, 2018 @ 12:46 pm

My, my, this thread has turned into a two minutes’ hate of me personally. Most of the commenters disparaging me don’t address what I wrote, but instead repeat their preferred adjectives about Trump and his supporters, and obsess over Trump’s personality.


Politico is not a right-wing or pro-Trump outlet. It is not given to writing puff pieces about this administration. Yes, the article was somewhat speculative, although it did quote Sarah Sanders saying that the President would give an “America First” speech. We’ll see.

Looking tough while remaining substance-free is what he does

President Moon of South Korea just praised our President bigly for helping to bring about the recent direct talks between the two Koreas, which the North requested (a suggestion that Rocket Man is feeling the heat).


The key House races in 2018 are FTMP not in places with large Hispanic populations (and remember that the DACAs are mostly Mexican, so non-Mexican Hispanics may not care as much). The key Senate races, other than Arizona and Nevada, are in states with few Hispanics, and immigration restriction is a net vote-winner in those states and possibly even in AZ and NV.


There’s no amount or source of evidence that will ever convince you of Trump’s incompetence, sadism, and narcissism

I dispute that characterization of Trump as a person, but even if it were true, I care about policy outcomes more than personality — and so do you, I imagine. Why don’t you “be honest”?

You’re not a level-headed, rational third-party observer free of bias and ideological blindspots

I have never claimed to be free of bias or ideology. I do try to base arguments I make in these discussions here on publicly available evidence (and evidence beyond my personal experience, which is what most people offer in political discussions because they don’t know or care to know any empirical facts).

You’re a Trump zealot–a to-the-bitter-end partisan

On this blog, I have criticized Trump when I found it warranted: staying in Afghanistan, for instance. I have also stated any number of times that if Trump seriously fails me on the issues I care about, immigration above all, I’ll be done with him. So far, given my ideological priors, Trump has done better than his predecessors going back decades, but he hasn’t satisfied me on everything. I bet that’s how you thought of Obama.

#24 Comment By Siarlys Jenkins On January 11, 2018 @ 12:49 pm

People are being a little unfair to Noah172. He does make an effort to supply data, or at least alleged data, in support of his positions. And he actually shows considerable evidence of thinking these things through. He’s made some firm criticisms of Trump’s performance in some areas. I think he’s wrong about most political issues, a bit credulous in his faith that Trump will deliver, but he actually makes arguments that need to be answered. He’s not one of the ones who simply spew rhetorical assertions.

As to my own debate with Noah about the 0.1 percent and the top 10 percent, we have in this very thread individuals asserting certain hard data, a majority of those over a certain income level supported Trump, and Noah asserting hard data that is markedly different.

One of the problems with this sort of statistic is that it is hard to aggregate individual performance with absolute precision. Its a secret ballot after all. If every ballot cross-referenced to a voter’s tax returns, and each vote was entered into a public data base, we could be VERY precise. As it is, various people, who often have an ax to grind, compile districts, SMSA’s, exit polls, and try to reach an approximation. So we should recognize the uncertainties and imprecisions when we make such claims to each other. Here is one quick reference:


It is, for reasons I’ve already stated, possible that there are serious flaws in how the data was compiled. Noah may be able to highlight how and why it is inaccurate, or provide another source that came to a different conclusion. Taking this source as valid, I think where Noah has his best argument is with the $50,000 – $99,999 income bracket. This could be considered middle class at today’s prices, includes some of the better paid strata of the working class, and it seems to have given Trump a 4 point lead.

But what is more significant is that in ALL income brackets, it was close. Its not like the proletariat gave Hillary 85 percent, or the plutocrats of international finance capital gave Trump 90 percent. Its also not like the “white working class” could have gone 90 percent for The Donald, because that’s enough voters some of the income ranges would have been at least somewhat more lopsided.

So stereotypes are not helpful. One of the key weaknesses of Marxist political philosophy is the assumption that “the working class” are going to more or less vote as Marxist theory predicts. The working class, like the bourgeoisie, like Black People, like Italians, are a rather diverse set, and individuals vote a lot of different ways for a lot of different reasons, rational or irrational, short-term or long-term.

#25 Comment By Polichinello On January 11, 2018 @ 2:05 pm

Trump was always going to be a disappointment. Most of us knew this going in, and we voted for him only because as bad as he is, he is still better than all the alternatives the GOP and the Democrats offered. Trump was always a Hail Mary pass. After immigation, no other issue comes close to mattering.

It might well turn out that he lied about immigration. Yeah, there was a chance of that. So what? Jeb! and Hillary were going to do that and much worse. At least if we go down, we can take some cold comfort in the fact that Conservatism, Inc. has been thoroughly discredited as a political force as well.

Generic Americans will simply have to move one. Once liberal whites self-exterminate through their childlessness, we’ll make ethnic coalitions with the other races we’ve foolishly invited in and divide the spoils like any other multicultural empire.

#26 Comment By collin On January 11, 2018 @ 4:05 pm

Wouldn’t be surprised in Trump read a Miller-drafted statement in Davos, telling everyone to think of the forgotten people. It will be weak, but more than enough for our friend Noah.

NO NO NO!!!! Davos is going to have an international crowd and if Trump reads a Miller-drafted version of anything that is:

1) Piss off half the people in the room from Asia and non-European nations. I sure they want to the rantings a white nationalist and white identity politics of Stephen Miller!
2) Some of Trump’s political strengths is he tends speak to the present crowd well. (This is a normal CEO strength.)

In terms of what Trump has done is:

1) Trump has moved the goalposts on Immigration but he is not going to win the DACA Immigrants. They are too organized, educated, successful and relatively innocent for Trump to pursue deportation. Closed Borders supporters are over-stating the effects of immigration on wages and they will lose the arguments against DACA.
2) I still don’t see what is that wrong on speaking at Davos. I rather our President work with the economic elite than against them.
3) Maybe this is time for Trump to prove himself globally and learn to be President. (Also remember he tweets less when he is on the road.)

I still believe if he lost his phone charger, I bet his approvals would hit 50%.

#27 Comment By collin On January 11, 2018 @ 4:14 pm

I still believe if he lost his phone charger, I bet his (Trumps) approvals would hit 50%.

Maybe Fox and Friends, can run a segment on the benefits of shutting down your cell phone every morning!

#28 Comment By Noah172 On January 11, 2018 @ 4:53 pm


Thank you for the first paragraph of your 12:49 comment.

I don’t want to belabor the discussion about who The Rich support. You are talking about different things than what I was talking about. The 0.1% is, by definition, a tiny sliver of the population and electorate, but they have massively disproportionate influence. You then answer questions which weren’t asked about broad income cohorts with tens of millions of members.

Exit polls are flawed — they measure people who voted on election day, thus missing the ever-larger numbers of early voters — but they are still useful evidence as long as you can read between the lines to decipher on which points their accuracy might be strongest and on which weakest. I didn’t only allude to exit polls, however. I also mentioned voting results from the neighborhoods and municipalities where top 0.1/next 9.9 people live, and campaign donation data. The latter two categories are, as you say, hard data rather than extrapolation.

#29 Comment By EngineerScotty On January 11, 2018 @ 5:35 pm

What’s sad is you’re clearly not unintelligent and yet you’ve chosen a messiah so obviously unworthy of devotion and defense.

The problem is, when your causes include white nationalism and anti-Semitism, messiahs that are worthy of devotion and defense are in short supply. Noah’s complaint about Trump here is that Trump is now betraying the evils that he pledged to support.

To continue the Star Wars: The Last Jedi theme, Noah is now discovering that the politician he thought was Kylo Ren, was actually DJ.

#30 Comment By Noah172 On January 11, 2018 @ 6:24 pm

EngineerScotty wrote:

To continue the Star Wars: The Last Jedi theme, Noah is now discovering that the politician he thought was Kylo Ren, was actually DJ

Thus, I am down on Trump because he isn’t “evil” enough… but this comment thread is filled with denunciations of me as a slavish cultist of Trump who defends anything he does or says, even when it goes against my stated “evil” principles.

Which is it?

#31 Comment By TR On January 11, 2018 @ 9:03 pm

As I’ve said before, Noah172 deserves to be answered, not mocked. He also is working overtime (for free) on this entry. Liberals should appreciate someone who attempts at least to supply “facts” rather than inane abstractions like “human nature” or the “marketplace” or something about “a rising tide” helping everyone.

#32 Comment By David Nash On January 11, 2018 @ 9:32 pm

Noah172 says: January 11, 2018 at 6:24 pm
Which is it?”

Your question was not addressed to me, but I shall take the liberty of answering it.

We are, each of us, what other people imagine us to be, friends and unfriends alike. On the Internet, that is.

A name and a comment, words on a screen, but human try and go beyond the words to the person. But online is hard to do that. There are no, at least very few,. clues to age, sex, character, education, or attitude. So we try and fill in the blanks. Usually with deplorable results.

I am guilty of this myself. (Alas!)

It is common to all niches of the ‘Net, from the Extreme Left to the Rad Right, and all places between.

So, to the unseen Others, you can ben and often are, many contradictory things at once. Frankly, I disagree with most, if not all of your postings, but I think you came by them honestly, and are not really a sock puppet for the ghost of George Lincoln Rockwell.

At the same time, it is possible that someone can look at Donald John Trump, and not see what I see: a relatively ignorant New York real-estate thug who did not expect to win the election, who hoped to use it to launch a new internet brand (since his old ones were failing) and rival Fox News, who has absolutely no ideology or political program but only a media-savvy understanding that saying certain things gets him the applause which he desperately wants, who will cheerfully throw anyone under the bus but his beloved family. (I give him points for Family, since he was likely (per a plethora of reports on the history of the Trump family before DJT.) disappointed in the way his own father ran their family while Donald was growing up, and wants to do better.)

I can believe other people cannot see this, because my own daughter cannot. (We avoid politics when we meet.)

So, while the chances of your persuading me to your point of view are probably about as dismal as my persuading you to mine, may I say, Carry On. (“For, who knows, the Horse may learn to Sing.”)

#33 Comment By Patrick On January 12, 2018 @ 2:00 am

Just by winning, Trump stopped TPP. That is better on trade than everyone else running w/r globalization.

#34 Comment By JonF On January 12, 2018 @ 1:22 pm

Re: Just by winning, Trump stopped TPP.

At that point pretty much everyone had disavowed the trade pact– including Hillary Clinton.

#35 Comment By JonF On January 12, 2018 @ 1:23 pm

Re :Noah is now discovering that the politician he thought was Kylo Ren, was actually DJ.

Or maybe Jar Jar Binks grown old and mean and potty-mouthed.

#36 Comment By amhixson On January 12, 2018 @ 1:29 pm

Noah172: I dispute that characterization of Trump as a person, but even if it were true, I care about policy outcomes more than personality — and so do you, I imagine.

Up to a point.

When it comes to the President of the United States, personality is all too relevant.

I have also stated any number of times that if Trump seriously fails me on the issues I care about, immigration above all, I’ll be done with him.

Talk is cheap.

I’ll believe it when I see it.

So far, given my ideological priors, Trump has done better than his predecessors going back decades, but he hasn’t satisfied me on everything. I bet that’s how you thought of Obama.

You bet wrong.

IMO, Obama was the second coming of Jimmy Carter. A smart, decent guy (for a politician) in way over his head once he got to D.C.

Obama talked big on reform, but he was only willing to do it within the existing corporate framework. When push came to shove, he wasn’t willing to take on the greedhead class in any meaningful way. He ran as a reformist social democrat, but governed as a moderate center-left capitalist.

I do think he was better than either McCain or Romney would’ve been, but that’s not a high bar to clear.

#37 Comment By Siarlys Jenkins On January 12, 2018 @ 3:02 pm

Noah, the discussion was originally about whether people with incomes under $75,000 a year supported Hillary or Donald. It was not limited the most elite sliver of the electorate. And I think when you have to “read between the lines” of unreliable data, to offer a conclusion, there isn’t much substance to analyze. I’m still waiting for you or anyone to offer more comprehensive data, more precise data, and good cause to believe that the data offered is accurate.

#38 Comment By bt On January 12, 2018 @ 3:06 pm

“Don’t delude yourself that his going to Davos will alieniate the MAGA crowd.”


That is right. Fox News and Sinclair will be there, interpreting all of the events for the consumption of the GOP voting base.

It’s going to be a huge success for America, people and it’s guaranteed in advance.

#39 Comment By Patrick On January 13, 2018 @ 3:56 pm


I mean Trump’s victory shuts down any new trade deal talks for the duration of his presidency. That can’t be said for any of his 2016 opponents except maybe Sanders, Clinton suddenly ignoring her positions of the last two decades for temporary convenience notwithstanding: she’d no doubt switch back. Trump? He’s been talking about bad trade deals since the Eighties.

Trump is still the “least bad” on trade, even if he and his coalition can’t do much about current deals. The only canndidate who could be better on trade wouldn’t come from the Democrats or the establishment GOP; it’d have to be a Trumpier version of Trump. And that is why Trump’s supporters still support him.

That and we’re Deplorable rubes to begin with, haha.

#40 Comment By Dan Green On January 15, 2018 @ 9:26 am

My take is the secret service is going to have their hands full. Excellent location for Trump to be whacked.