ActRight

There were a lot of losers in this election, well beyond Hillary Clinton and the smug, incompetent pollsters and know-it-all, groupthink pundits who embarrassed themselves. From hacked e-mail troves we received a glimpse of the bankrupt values of Washington journalists, lawyers, politicians, lobbyists, and wealthy donors. Despite their brand-name Ivy League degrees and 1 percenter ré​sumé​s, dozens of the highly paid grandees who run our country and shape our news appear petty and spiteful — and clueless about the America that exists beyond their Beltway habitat. Leveraging rich people for favors and money seems an obsession. They brag about wealth and status in the fashion of preteens. Journalists often violated their own ethics codes during the campaign. Political analyst Donna Brazile even leaked debate topics to the Clinton team. Washington Post columnist Dana Milbank reportedly asked the Democratic National Committee to provide him with anti-Trump research. Reading about the characters who inhabit the Clinton campaign e-mail trove, one wonders about the purpose of their Yale degrees, their tenures at Goldman Sachs, even their very stints in the Clinton campaign. Was the end game to lose their souls? One big loser is the Obama Justice Department — or rather the very concept of justice as administered by the present administration. It has gone the tainted way of the IRS, VA, and NSA. The Justice Department clearly pressured the FBI to limit its investigation of pay-for-play corruption at the Clinton Foundation and the State Department. Seemingly every few weeks of the campaign, FBI director James Comey flip-flopped — depending on whether the most recent pressure on him came from rank-and-file FBI agents, the Clinton campaign, or his boss, Attorney General Loretta Lynch. Lynch met with Bill Clinton in a secret “accidental” encounter on an airport tarmac while Hillary Clinton was under investigation. Immunity was granted to several Clinton aides without the FBI obtaining much cooperation in return. Clinton techies invoked the Fifth Amendment in refusing to testify before Congress. Clinton campaign organizer John Podesta was in direct contact with his old friend, Peter Kadzik, a high-ranking Justice Department official who was tipping off the Clinton campaign about an impending hearing and a legal filing regarding Clinton’s e-mails. Until he was reassigned, Kadzik was in charge of the Justice Department’s probe of the Huma Abedin/Anthony Weiner e-mail trove. A special prosecutor should have been appointed. But Democrats and Republicans alike had long ago soured on the use of special prosecutors. Democrats felt that Ken Starr went way beyond his mandates in pursuing Bill Clinton’s excesses. Republicans charged that Lawrence Walsh’s investigation of the Iran-Contra affair had turned into a witch hunt. But now, it is clear why there was — and still is — a need for special prosecutors in some instances. In an election year, the Obama Justice Department certainly cannot investigate Obama’s former secretary of state and heir to the Obama presidency — much less itself. Another election casualty is the practice of extended voting. The recent trend to open state polls early and over several days is proving a terrible idea. Campaigns (think 1980, 1992, and 2000) are often not over until the last week. When millions of people vote days or even weeks before Election Day, what the candidates say or do in the critical final days becomes irrelevant. When a candidate urges citizens, “Vote early,” it is synonymous with, “Vote quickly, before more dirt surfaces about my ongoing scandals.” Voting should return to a single event, rather than becoming a daily tracking poll. President Obama lost big-time as well. He emerged from his virtual seclusion to campaign on behalf of Clinton in a way never before seen with a sitting president. By Election Day, Obama had resorted to making fun of Donald Trump’s baseball hats, and he took the low road of claiming that Trump would tolerate the Ku Klux Klan. While encouraging Latinos to vote during an interview with actress Gina Rodriguez, Obama seemingly condoned voting by illegal immigrants when he said that Immigration and Customs Enforcement would not be investigating voter rolls. A Trump victory, along with a Republican majority in both houses of Congress, is a repudiation of the Obama administration’s legacy and its effort to navigate around the law. The high-tech industry and Silicon Valley lost as well. The new high-tech class prides itself on its laid-back attitude rather than its super-wealth — casual clothes, hip tastes, and cool informality. But in fact, we have learned from WikiLeaks that the 21st-century high-tech aristocracy is more conniving and more status-conscious — and far more powerful — than were Gilded Age capitalists such as John D. Rockefeller and Andrew Carnegie. Billionaire CEO Eric Schmidt of Google advised the Clinton campaign to hire “low-paid” urban campaign operatives, apparently in hopes that his efforts would earn him some sort of informal Svengali advisory role in a hoped-for Clinton administration. A leaked e-mail from tech executive Sheryl Sandberg revealed that Facebook’s Mark Zuckerberg wanted to meet with people on the Clinton team who could help him understand “political operations to advance public-policy goals.” It became easy to say that a “crude” Trump and a “crooked” Clinton polluted the 2016 campaign. The real culprits were a corrupt Washington elite, who were as biased as they were incompetent — and clueless about how disliked they were by the very America they held in such contempt. — Victor Davis Hanson is a classicist and historian at the Hoover Institution, Stanford University, and the author, most recently, of The Savior Generals. You can reach him by e-mailing [email protected]. © 2016 Tribune Media Services, Inc.

Sounds like even Michael Moore has jumped on the Trump Train. Maybe that's because Trump advocates for Americanism and Clinton promotes globalism. ==========...

Mr. Trump’s win allows the West to break free from the "captivity" of political correctness, Hungarian Prime Minister Viktor Orbán has said.

In the wake of Donald Trump’s stunning victory over Hillary Clinton in one of the greatest political upsets of all time, everyone is rushing to uncover the lessons of the election. Was Donald Trump a unique candidate? Did he uncover a vast movement? Has he crafted a new coalition of voters capable of forming a durable majority in future elections? The justifiable excitement that surrounds victory often leads to overenthusiastic projections from sparse data points. That’s obviously the tendency after a result nobody sees coming. But it would be a mistake to draw too broadly from a unique election result. Some lessons can be learned; some false lessons should be avoided. First, the real lessons. Election Spending Means Almost Nothing When Media Coverage Is Wall-to-Wall Donald Trump was heavily outspent in the battleground states. In Florida, Hillary destroyed him on the airwaves — but he won the state anyway. The overbroad lesson here would be simple: You never have to spend money on ads. After all, Trump spent practically nothing on TV advertisements during the primaries, but squashed the lead spender, Jeb! Bush. And yet that would ignore the advantages of Trump’s name recognition and massive media dominance. Mitt Romney didn’t spend early enough on ads in 2012, and it hurt him. Trump was never hurt by staying off the air, because Trump already had name recognition. Republicans running for president should worry about getting their names out there before the primaries if they want to avoid blowing out their bank accounts on ads most voters will speed through with Tivo. The Media Can Destroy Candidates, but Cannot Help Bad Candidates The true story of this election cycle isn’t Donald Trump’s supposed mass movement. As of Wednesday afternoon, Donald Trump had won approximately 59.6 million popular votes. In 2012, Mitt Romney won 60.9 million popular votes; Barack Obama won 65.9 million. In 2008, John McCain won 59.9 million popular votes; Obama won 69.5 million. Meaning Trump underperformed Romney and performed on par with McCain in a vastly expanded electorate. That’s not the mark of a huge wave. The media was able to achieve with Trump what they achieved with his two predecessors: They made him look unpalatable. But they weren’t able to achieve palatability for Hillary Clinton. She lost approximately 10 million votes from Barack Obama’s 2008 election total. This election was clearly a referendum on Hillary, and she failed. The media couldn’t prop her up. Obama couldn’t prop her up. Minorities didn’t show up to vote for her. Nobody showed up for her. And so she lost. Non-College-Educated White Voters Are a Voting Block For decades, Democrats have treated blacks, Hispanics, Asians, women, Jews, and nearly every other ethnic and sexual constituency as an independent voting block, targeting them individually. Republicans have heretofore ignored that sort of tribal campaigning. Trump was the first major Republican candidate to see non-college-educated white voters as a distinct voting block worth pursuing. He campaigned on the basis of trade restrictions and on punishment for employers moving out of Rust Belt areas, while fighting back against the Left’s anti-white, anti-Christian agenda. The result: Non-college-educated white voters went for Trump by a whopping 72 percent to 23 percent margin, according to CBS News’s exit polls. By contrast, Clinton won the Hispanic vote 65 percent to 29 percent. In other words, Trump won non-college-educated whites by a larger margin than Clinton won Hispanics. That’s amazing, but it’s also a testament to the alienation of non-college whites from the Democratic politicians who have patronized them for decades — calling them “bitter clingers” and “deplorables.” #share#Now, the false lessons that people seem to be learning, but that should be put to bed immediately. ‘Polls Don’t Matter’ Pollsters are catching a lot of grief in this election cycle. That’s entirely appropriate, given the fact that the polls were wrong about Michigan, Pennsylvania, and Wisconsin — Hillary had solid leads in the poll averages in all of those states. But in the vast majority of states, the polls were correct, and nationally, they were correct as well. The polls made the mistake of underestimating Trump’s support, or overestimating Hillary’s turnout. As Carl Bialik and Harry Enten put it at FiveThirtyEight, “state polls and forecasts based on them miss in the same direction. . . . The more whites without college degrees were in a state, the more Trump outperformed his FiveThirtyEight polls-only adjusted polling average.” Yes, that’s an error. Yes, that’s a problem. But the substitution of chicken-entrails-reading or Bill Mitchell-esque poll “uncucking” is not a solution. The solution is better polling, not distrusting all data, or at the very least, understanding the nature of probabilistic predictions, rather than deeming a 51 percent chance of something happening a 100 percent chance of it happening. ‘The White Vote Is Enough’ Donald Trump won on the back of non-college-educated white voters. He specifically got high turnout in swing-state rural areas where Mitt Romney underperformed, and that was enough to turn those states red thanks to Hillary’s egregiously low voter turnout. But the white vote represented 72 percent of the vote in 2012, compared with just 70 percent in 2016; the black vote represented 12 percent in 2016, down from 13 percent in 2012; the Latino vote inched up to 11 percent of the electorate from 10 percent in 2012. Trump did better than Romney among Latinos (he lost them 65-29, compared with 71-27 for Romney) and blacks (lost 88-8, compared with 93-7 for Romney) and young people (lost 54-37, compared with 60-37). Shift any of those numbers slightly and Trump loses the election. In 2020, Millennials will represent nearly 40 percent of eligible voters, and Latinos will represent 15 percent of the electorate; blacks will likely remain steady. To be competitive in the years to come, Republicans need to make inroads outside their white working-class base. #related#‘The Ground Game Is in Our Hearts’ The aforementioned Mitchell infamously tweeted that Trump supporters didn’t need a ground game; the ground game was “in our hearts.” It wasn’t. It was in the Republican National Committee’s databanks, at least in large measure. The RNC’s Sean Spicer said that the party’s ground game was “outstanding,” and Trump had no ground game whatsoever. Yes, enthusiasm for Trump was high, particularly in rural areas. But as previously pointed out, Trump’s overall voting numbers didn’t outpace Romney’s in 2012. The ground game did matter. All of this is important for 2020 and beyond. Republicans would be wise to consider the real lessons of 2016 before buying into myths about spontaneous mass movements, lasting demographic coalitions, and the invalidity of data in the face of anecdotal evidence. — Ben Shapiro is the editor-in-chief of the DailyWire.com.

But at least our pot is legal!

Hillary Clinton supporters protested outside President-Elect Donald Trump’s New York City home, Trump Tower, Wednesday night in which an effigy ...

The Obamas refused to be photographed welcoming President-Elect Donald Trump and his wife Melania to the White House Thursday morning, ...

…sobbing also ensues. Recent Videos: https://youtu.be/X0ZWQKiaESw Feminist Depravity (Canadian MGTOW Newsbreak) https://youtu.be/WmyEcuss8JM Great American B...

Imgur: The most awesome images on the Internet.

Description Bout time someone that can't be bought takes charge..

A Trump campaign official repeated denials that exchanges occurred between the president-elect and Kremlin.

Despite sex assault allegations hounding him, fat-shaming a former beauty queen and his controversial abortion stand, a large number of women voters helped put Donald Trump in the White House. Some 53 percent of white women voters supported the Republican candidate, CNN said, the majority of them (62

Continuing Freedom of Information Act lawsuits and related litigation will keep former Secretary of State Hillary Clinton in the spotlight, despite her upset loss to President-Elect Donald Trump. C

You may asked what the Unites States did to narrow 350,000,000 people down to Hillary Clinton and Donald Trump as their leader. Keep in mind, this is the same county that at the same time is still mourning the death of a dead gorilla. By around 1:00am ET, the dead gorilla racked up more than […]

Democrats like to do this...

Sharpton: 'We Are Not Going Down Without a Fight and Donald Needs to Know That'

"We can't just do rallies, we have to..."

How Trump Can Overturn the Iran Deal - Leah Barkoukis: Donald Trump has long called the Iran deal a disaster .11/10/2016 10:57:38AM EST.

Here's what awesome about the world's greatest fighting force.

A Better Way

The owner of a pub and bistro was fearing for his life when Somali migrants smashed the door and windows of his business after refusing to pay

Panic has taken hold all over the White House after Donald Trump’s upset victory.

ABC News journalist Martha Raddatz on election night struggled to not get emotional as the night got worse for Hillary Clinton. Speaking of Trump on foreign policy, her voice quivered, “I was also looking back [voice breaks] at an interview Tim Kaine gave. Tim Kaine has a son in the Marine Corps. He was asked, by John Dickerson, ‘So if Donald Trump is democratically elected, and your son is serving as a Marine, you wouldn't trust his life under that commander-in-chief? And Kaine said, ‘I wouldn't.”

With Donald Trump as president-elect, there are major questions about the extent to which he truly believes in the heterodox foreign and defense policy pos

And here we go!