Home | About | Donate

Donald Trump Wins, Wins, Wins in Nevada


Donald Trump Wins, Wins, Wins in Nevada

Amy Davidson

"We’re going to do it and it’s going to happen fast," Donald Trump said at his victory party on Tuesday night, at the Treasure Island Hotel, in Las Vegas, after winning the Nevada caucus by a large margin. Trump was referring to the great-again-making of America, which he portrayed as unfolding at breakneck speed—as fast as construction workers paid for by Mexico could build his border wall. But he might as well have meant his pursuit of the Republican nomination.


Wouldn't it be great if HRC was to the working class as Trump is to the capitalists and capitalist wannabes? Don't blame Trump, blame the democratic party and clubby liberal establishment that took over & developed after the 60's. Many got fame and fortune, but lazy and rich sitting on their asses. They got weak and it destroyed the momentum after the assassinations. They produced a fashion, hipster-like class of their own that forgot about the regular folks. They sold out. Hearing the comments from Witches #2&3 (Madeleine Albright & Gloria Steinem) as they preached to their female minions last week, reminds me of Nixon's comment "those people" (speaking of protesters of the War and him). They truly despise the working class at heart. All you have to do is listen then watch what they actually do. Trump, HRC along with her ilk, are the epitome of sleaziness that has risen to the top. This is where we are. If Bernie gets tossed (and he will) , and if it's Trump vs HRC, I'll vote for Trump. At least he might be the grenade that's tossed into the shithole called Washington, D.C. to open up the blockage. Yeah, it could stink-up the joint, but like a wound, it always hurts a little at first when you apply the medicine. Just my take. I could be wrong.


Agreed, Trump's cakewalk through the primaries was enabled when the Clintons and others formed the Democratic Leadership Council (DLC) in 1985 that narrowly focused the Party's mission to GET MORE CORPORATE CASH THAN THE GOP. The Democrats quickly proceeded to accelerate the Raygun revolution with their "bipartisan" 1986 tax "reform", the most regressive tax code revisions in history. With Bill Clinton's agenda to the right of Nixon's, the GOP had nowhere to go except faster and further to the right. The rest is history.

Although I won't vote Trump, I will vote against HRC and other DLC operatives in any election they run in. The blockage in DC does need to be cleared post haste.


True, I think you're right. Right before our eyes is the problem: A corrupt democratic party. There will be no stopping them either.


I think that the minorities would disagree with you on Mr. Drumpf being a better candidate than $hillery! I guess it depends on who you are to be able to make that statement.


The Democrats have a big edge in the electoral map for presidency but since Trump isn't a true conservative that may not matter. It is likely he will get demolished in debates with either Sanders or Clinton but for his supporters that might not matter either. All his supporters seem to want is for an outsider strong man to come in and change Washington. If there are enough of these people who could care less about liberal/progressive vs conservative, whether ignoring climate change could be catastrophic down the road, what would happen with a xenophobic racist president, etc vote for Trump we could have a bombastic real estate developer as the next president. A man who claims to care mainly about security in the security versus privacy question. That should be scary to a lot of people.


Perhaps because Ms. Davidson writes for a major New York magazine, and New York is "The Donald's" playground, she must show deference for this dangerous fascist-lite enfant terrible.

I find her analysis on a par with a sportscaster. Each move is examined along with scores, but no deeper judgment or assessment is offered. It's as if Ms. Davidson is merely a spectator enjoying the show and thereby embodying that same national interest in celebrity.

Whatever celebrity does is axiomatically fine... since Celebrity does it!

The power of media to christen stars cannot be under-estimated. It explains how Arnold S. got elected in California and Jesse Ventura in Wisconsin ... or whatever sate he governed.

The level of analysis found in Ms. Davidson's pieces glides over the genuine element in a manner that suggests that were she living in Germany in the l930s, she'd wax lyrical about the crowds that showed up to demonstrate homage to Hitler.

I just find this type of writing dangerous. It pretends there's no danger and invites viewers to just enjoy the show.

No wonder she got where she got in today's toxic (corporate controlled) media climate!


Your comment is more interested in roasting Democrats and Feminists than understanding the hidden dynamics that gave Capital primacy over elections and just about everything else inside this nation.

I suggest that you read the book, "Dark Money" by Jane Mayer. Otherwise, the "People Magazine" level of what passes for analysis--couched in indictments of particular persons--glosses over the logistics that made that sell-out inevitable.

And much of the problem can be attached to the deregulation of the mainstream media.

Prior to that deregulation there was such a thing as public interest broadcasts.

As very bright minds have argued, had Bill Clinton not signed away the PUBLIC'S air-waves, then the giant media consortiums would have been forced to give something back. And that something would have been FREE air time for all viable candidates.

Instead, with air time costing many thousands of dollars per one-minute advertisement, any politician with serious political ambitions must raise a fortune in order to get seen and heard.

Bernie Sanders has the stamina and backing to go state to state making direct public appearances. Enormous energy is required for that approach. And because his message truly speaks to bettering life for all those who have been sold out not so much by the flaws of particular persons, but by SYSTEMIC corruptions brought on by Big Money's dominance over so-called open elections, he has raised significant funds from people like me (and maybe you).

The attacks on persons is mostly subterfuge. Until the systemic flaws are remedied, very few people can pass through the election gauntlet without ending up sold-out.

The Supreme Court granting Big Money the right to buy candidates and thus election outcomes AND policies... and Dark Money interests funneling billions into the coffers of not just candidates but also academia and think tanks ARE the targets your arrows should be aiming at.

To take aim at low-lying fruit allows the poisonous tree to keep producing more of same.

Also: Not one commentator OR Ms. Davidson managed to mention the significant fact that Trump has gotten tons more attention, media spotlight, and free publicity than ANY other candidate. That always grants a "front runner" the edge.


Excellent, sagacious analysis! You just saved me a post.


Thanks SR, but I don't need to buy yet another book to clog up my shelves to know the basics of what's happened. Because I spent more than a few years in broadcast, I understand the concept of media consolidation and I know the basics of how politics work. That said, I'll take my chances swatting at whatever I can hit with what weapons I have. How much more theory or tidbits of someone elses reality does one need in order to paint a pretty good picture of what's obviously going on. Keep electing them and they will surely keep coming. There needs to be something to shake up D.C.. Trump might do that. Bernie would be best in the long run. But, HRC will be the worst choice of all. (Seems that the old fashioned, crusty liberals from years gone by, that got us to this point, always get the most upset when called out.)


Thank you. We (my area) dodged a bullet last night in the way of a tornado outbreak and with wild winds still blowing outside, I feel extremely energized... and thus jousting with the closet Hillary and Trump supporters in the forum today.


Sure, Michael, a seasoned media sage such as yourself could never benefit from reading another's scholarship. After all, you already know all the answers, don't you?

I wonder if all those for-profit genetic engineering companies will find the gene for arrogance right on the tip of the penis? It sure goes with "male turf."

P.S. Libraries actually make it possible to read books without the worry of purchasing any. There, problem solved!


I don't see the point of your argument, SR. We're mostly on the same page I think. But, Honestly SR, while I know you mean well, I just don't have a lot of time to decipher your cryptic messages...with astrology, planets, signs, astroids, mars, goddesses & gods and all that. I don't have time for it. In short, and in basic drivel that even I can understand, what got you all pissed off anyway?


With a comment of this nature, you do not deserve a fair or thoughtful response.

It's YOU who doesn't understand what I was deconstructing in the way of your original comment... because you are stuck in your own box.... and arguing FOR it.