Who Lost: A Biased Media, Pundits, Pollsters, Political Parties, Warmongers, the Corporatocracy, Pay-to-Play Grifters, Neoliberals

Sometimes who lost is more important than who won. Let’s review who lost the election:

1. Let’s start with the Corporatocracy, which expected to once again wield unlimited influence by funding political campaigns with millions of dollars in contributions and speaking fees.

2. A biased mainstream media. My mom-in-law was watching CBS all night, so that’s what we watched. All the pundits/anchors spoke in the hushed tones of a funeral. For two hours, the only images of campaign workers shown were the sad faces of Clinton supporters; not one image of jubilant Trump supporters was broadcast until Trump gave his acceptance speech.

When one of the talking heads noted that Hillary never generated the enthusiasm of the Sanders or Trump campaigns, his comment was followed by a stony silence. That he had given voice to a self-evident truth was not welcome.

3. Mainstream punditry: they got it wrong from the start and remained close-minded and arrogant in their postured superiority.

The punditry applied a double standard to Trump and Hillary. Trump’s speeches and ethically questionable history were judged by moral standards, and he was declared unfit.

Hillary’s actions, on the other hand, were judged by strictly legalistic standards: well, you can’t indict her, so she’s fit for office.

Dear punditry: you can’t use double standards to promote your biases and retain any shred of credibility.

4. Pollsters. Having rigged the polls via over-sampling and under-sampling, they were laughably wrong. Here is a typical headline from election night, from the New York Times: Trump Takes Florida, Closing In on a Stunning Upset.

Only the pollsters and the MSM were stunned.

5. Political parties. As my friend G.F.B. observed, both parties ran 20th century campaigns in the 21st century. Both parties lost for this reason; both are hopelessly out of touch with a rapidly changing America.

Democrats upset with losing should look at their party’s system of Super-Delegates that squelched Bernie Sander’s bid.

6. Warmongers. Many Americans are sick and tired of interventionist, globalist warmongering. The only possible way they could register their opposition to warmongering was to vote for Trump.

7. Pay-to-Play Grifters. Let the investigations, indictments, prosecutions and convictions begin as soon as Trump is sworn in.

8. Neoliberals. Globalization boils down to freeing mobile capital to rove the globe for opportunities to strip-mine cheap resources, assets and labor and then move on, leaving ruined communities behind.

9. Bonus loser: Fake Progressives. Fake Progressives are perfectly fine with soaring inequality and corrupt governance, as long as everyone’s public utterances are politically correct. So the oppressor class is acceptable as long as they speak respectfully while stepping on your neck.

Real Progressives see jobs and community as solutions, not welfare and central planning. Real Progressives see the eradication of warmongering Imperial pretensions and corrupt pay-to-play grifting as the essential projects of liberty and democracy.

Join me in seeking solutions by becoming a $1/month patron of my work via patreon.com.

My new book is #8 on Kindle short reads -> politics and social science: Why Our Status Quo Failed and Is Beyond Reform ($3.95 Kindle ebook, $8.95 print edition) For more, please visit the book’s website.

Facebooktwittergoogle_plusredditpinterestlinkedinmail
This entry was posted in General and tagged , . Bookmark the permalink.
  • diogenes

    One benefit is the demonstration provided by the wholly-Wall Street owned Democratic Party machine in crushing a Bernie Sanders nomination when it was apparent that he was FAR the stronger candidate — the demonstration that the Democratic Party is a toxic fraud.

  • slorter

    Hopefully those things sighted will see the dustbin quickly! The future going to be an interesting ride hopefully a beneficial one for the planet and all the creatures that inhabit its surface!

  • Tannenhouser

    The American people lost. Nothings changed it’s business as usual. I repeat NOTHING will or has changed. Trumps choice for VP proves it. Just wait till his fills the spots in his administration. Say hello to the new boss …….same as the old boss. The minority (ghetto) vote was courted and then abandoned by Obama, now the middle America (white trash) vote has been successfully courted, and will soon be abandoned, like soiled undoes. That supposed ‘alternative’ media like this is spewing this ‘we’, win garbage is proof again that …….everybody knows the dice are loaded, What a disgrace. The best thing to come from this election is the knowledge that the WHOLE damn thing is ‘establishment’ even ‘anti-establishment’ like this page and others. Good luck to those who are paying attention, you are on your own.

    • Zap

      Agree……what we are now all supposed to put the Obama brand Kool Aid down, take a big drink of Trump brand Kool Aid and sing la la la? Until people learn the central bankers and their “think tanks” most notably the CFR are really running both parties and the entire government , media, academic show, nothing will change.
      Trumps already talking about CFR president Richard Haas and Steve Mnuchin of Soros Management LLC for his cabinet.

  • diogenes

    “After 1895 the political and social problems which confronted the people of

    the United States were no longer sectional. These … related first to the

    astonishing growth of material prosperity and the distribution of wealth;

    and second … to a strong and rapid drift toward something like State

    Socialism [i.e. public control of finance and corporations]…. At the

    beginning of the McKinley adminstration the country reached a pitch of

    material well-being such as had never before been known. It was not,

    however, so much the growth of wealth as the manner of its distribution

    which now beame significant — not the riches of the nation, but the riches

    of individuals. Until 1860-65, the national wealth had been widely

    diffused. After 1865 it began to be gathered in to great fortunes. [Before

    this time] in the words of Mr. James Bryce, [there were] ‘no great fortunes

    in America, few larger fortunes, and no poverty…. Now [1895] there is

    some poverty, many large fortunes, and a greater number of gigantic fortunes

    than in any other country of the world.’… Thus, it was computed in 1896

    that one-eighth of the families in the United States possessed at least

    seven-eighths of all the country’s wealth. The assertion was also made in

    1903 that the 24 men who then composed the directorate of the United States

    Steel Corporation controled at least one-twelfth of the total wealth of the

    United States …. The rapidity with which wealth had grown was balanced by

    the startling inequality of its distribution…. That the rapid growth of

    wealth and its unequal distribution were known in many cases to be the

    result of inequaltiy before the law explains the discontent which throve

    among the American people during the years with which this narrative has to

    do [1885-1905].,,, The fortunes that had been gained through illicit favor,

    in defiance of the law and by the debauchery of those who had been chosen to

    make and to administer the law — these aroused a widespread and steadily

    deepening resentment…. For twenty years the courts had been practically

    impotent to check and to destroy the power of monopoly. Americans began to

    feel that the orderly processes of the law were unavailing. Petty

    criminals, underlings, and agents were sometimes punished; yet no great

    criminal of the wealthy class had ever been sent to prison, but was at most

    permitted to escape on the payment of a fine which was to him of no more

    consequence than the copper coin which one tosses to an urchin in the

    streets. The feeling of helpless rage which spread through the West in 1892

    had permeated the entire country in 1905, and had prepared the minds of the

    people for measures far more drastic than any which had hitherto ben known

    in the Republic.” [Harry Thurston Peck, Twenty Years Of The Republic

    1885-1905 (London, Hodder & Stoughton, 1906) p. 725-726 & 731-732 citing

    Bryce, American Commonwealth vol. 2 p. 616 (New York, 1895); Spahr, Present

    Distribution of Wealth (NY, 1896) p. 69; and John Graham Brooks, The Social

    Unrest (New York, 1904) p. 68-106; my italics]

    Sound familiar? Wall Street rammed America into the First World War, and made a killing doing it (the Du Ponts bought General Motors with their profits selling gunpowder to Europeans to kill each other. What war are we going to be rammed into now? Will America survive it? Or is America already dead?

  • NOS

    Guess which world leader was called first by Trump after winning?

    The Israeli Hitler who has zombified the Palestinians for decades!

    How will Trump be different than Obama or Khillary?

    You’re just dealing with a two-headed snake. The difference between the GOP and the DNC is the same as the difference between Pepsi and Coca-Cola.

    • Zap

      Exactly so, its the Rockefeller CFR Democrats vs the Rockefeller CFR Republicans and the only conflict they have is the elections which is merely to determine who is first in line to eat at the central bank trough and who gets the leftovers.

  • Who won: Rush Limbaugh, Sean Hannity, Mike Savage, David Duke, Breitbart (Steve Bannon), FOX “news”, Mike Levin, Alex Jones, Roger Stone, The Blaze, The Daily Caller, and the entire billionaires rightwing media empire. Racists won, mysogynists won, islamophobes won, people who hate hispanics and minorities won.

    • Zap

      Islam is notoriously misogynist, homophobic and intolerant of all other faiths and creeds one might remind you but it seems you think whatever the left side blue team CFR banker elites want you to think so pointing out the obvious isn’t likely to do you any good.

    • AveryGrace1776

      Please take a moment and read your comment. The only one attacking people and dividing people into groups are from the Left. Many of the names mentioned above been grouped with someone like David Duke is beyond insulting. FOR EXAMPLE It would be unfair to associate all Muslims with 911, yet you want to associate every conservative with David Duke. Isn’t that the same thing? The difference is no one is associating all Muslims with 911 and conservatives are constantly attacked with this rhetoric. It is a false narrative and you know it.

  • Ernst

    Trump, however, did make a show of offering voters a meaningful choice on a range of economic issues, even if his proposed remedies are half-baked and seriously misconceived. Moreover, he drew the bulk of his support not so much from the median voter, but from those in the $50,000-$100,000 income bracket, a better-off segment of the population as Hough indicates, which may seem surprising to some. But as a sociologist friend pointed out to me, these are the people who, especially in relation to the generation before them, are now feeling squeezed economically.

    A self-employed electrician or owner of a small car-repair shop, after they have paid business insurance, their taxes, and the wages of the one or two employees they have, may seem flush with $50,000 a year in the bank. But health insurance has to be paid for out of this, as have the ever-increasing fees of two college-age children (say). If there are elderly parents, often with mounting healthcare needs and an insurance plan not adequate to pay for expensive treatments, then our self-employed person may have to top-up their insurance, as well as providing other forms of financial assistance. The $50,000 soon melts away, and most of the time this person could be one serious emergency away from a financial crisis.