Monday, November 5, 2018

The Grand Finale: Depression on the Left

Friends, today American Greatness has published the last installment in my four-part series about the Democrats' likely reaction to defeat in the midterm elections. I see CNN today has doubled down on its prediction that the Dems will prevail by 13 points. Ha! They sure do have a sense of humor! I jest, of course -- liberals have no discernible sense of humor, and if the "blue wave" doesn't come to pass you can bet they will be distraught, to say the least. The last part of my analysis considers the question of how many will descend into a deep depression...and how many may give up on the Democratic Party or the liberal movement altogether. The number need not be high to guarantee President Trump re-election in 2020. See what you think...


  1. Dr. Waddy:Your thoughts about possible manifestations of leftist frustration should they fluff tomorrow are intriguing. Especially so is your use of the example set by Michael Moore.

    Should the left be defeated tomorrow we may have an example in reverse, in NYS today and as odds are it will be on Wednesday, as to what forms resignation might take. Lots of NY conservatives have reached the point where it appears to them that Cuomo will do just about whatever he pleases and that he can't be stopped. The left is so very deeply established now in this state, I'm finding in my mostly frustrated efforts to combat them.

    But if the left is denied the national vindication it seeks and expects tomorrow I'd predict that in states like CA, NY, MA, MD, Conn., OR and maybe Colo., Il. and Washington State it will seek to build and defend unrepentent leftist fortresses. Cuomo's apparent intention to force socialized health care on NY, to the exclusion of all private plans, is a harbinger of this and of course Gov. Moonbeam would bustle in dreamy lalaism.

    Real terrorism is another possibility and if the considerable very far left which has hijacked the Dem vessel decides its time to throw down, will emerge. "These people will not go easily" (Bannon).

    When the South was driven under in 1865 many Southerners took comfort in the yet continued dominance of their culture in their home, despite, for a time, its political disarmament and their rule in national matters by the despised Yankee nation. Spurned leftists may mimic this behavior; I don't think they will ever shake the conviction that they must eventually prevail.

    Then again, massively widespread debilitating depression among the foofoo would spark a lively market in all manner, chemical or advisory, of remedies and that can't hurt the economy and may keep them gainfully distracted.

  2. Ha! Jack, as always your fertile imagination has the lefties pegged. You're right that the answer to all our problems could be purely pharmaceutical in nature... Why didn't I think of that? After tomorrow, many will slip into narcosis of their own free will, and as for the rest -- perhaps they could be declared incompetent (not much of a stretch) and generously medicated by trained psychiatrists... Arguably this would improve leftists' quality of life considerably! I'd take powerful mind-altering drugs over MSNBC any day...

    You're also wise to anticipate that the leftists would start to build redoubts of lunacy on the coasts, at the state and local level, if they don't prevail in 2018 (and especially if they don't prevail in 2020). In these islands of socialism they could construct a more or less congenial environment for their kind -- unless, that is, Lincoln was right that "a house divided cannot stand". It's difficult to imagine the Left accepting permanent marginalization, given their penchant for totalitarianism, but I suppose anything is possible.

  3. Dr. Waddy: I tend ( though I know it is not intellectually sound) to look at current affairs from the perspective of one who will 20 years from now be beyond temporal and mundane considerations. Supposing Douglass, a man the South might have supposed somewhat amenable to their views, had prevailed in 1860. Lincoln's "house divided" speech might not have gained the reverance it garners today. I've always had misgivings about it; was he saying that the North might accept slavery as the law of the land? I can't see that. But then again, perhaps he was predicting the national schism which surely ( and beyond his ken)did come upon his election. I cannot, in my lifetime, ever foresee the left giving up but they may well be containable.

  4. Jack, mark my words: hope is the wellspring of resistance, and thus most of the Resistance against Trump will collapse, as soon as its proven to the diehards that their efforts are futile. That may take a while, mind you, especially for some of them.

    As you know, I've always thought Lincoln was overrated and that he bears partial responsibility both for the fact that we had a Civil War and that it was so long and devastating. In the end, all houses are divided -- the question is how great should those divisions be? In my opinion, the country would have been better off upholding states' rights and letting slavery die a more natural death by waiting a generation or two for it to become outmoded and unviable. Not a popular view, I know, but one has to consider the immense costs of abolishing slavery more hastily.

  5. Dr. Waddy: My limited knowledge of that era leads me neverthe less to say your views are plausible. I think it entirely possible that the terrible institution would have faded in a manner far more favorable to its victims,as being a product of social and technological evolution, had the Confederacy forced on the battlefield some concession to its views. But I also think Lincoln's determination to preserve the Union and with it (after Antietam, albeit by implication) the authority to outlaw the detested and for many of its victims, unbearable
    regime, was noble. Sans an impossible view of the next 100 years, it may well have been seen then as morally irrefutable. Of course Lincoln and the North could not have foreseen the rise of the great dictatorships in the 20th century and the essential role of a united U.S. in defeating them but they enabled it nonetheless by assuring a united America. Had the Nazis or Commies have prevailed the former slaves would have been reenslaved.

  6. Good point, Jack -- no movement has ever practiced enslavement on a more lavish scale than the communists!

    I agree that preserving the Union was vital, on a certain level, and you credit Lincoln with doing so, but you could also blame him for breaking the Union in the first place... The birth of the Confederacy was a by-product of Lincoln's election. What would America have looked like if Douglas or Breckenridge had been elected instead?