Elections Have Consequences

How quickly things can change.

America itself is now about to flip, in no small part due to Donald Trump’s presidency.

It’s Dr. Turley (again), this time with background and commentary on the breaking news of the resignation of a Supreme Court Justice:

Trump has already gotten one conservative on the Supremes’ team:
Neil Gorsuch. Adding another will change future generations of law in America. This is huge, guys.

Here is the White House list of possible candidates from the previous so-called “shortlist” used to pick Gorsuch.

And this is the infamous Federalist Society, which will have once more have significant input into President Trump’s second selection. The Senate grilling of whoever is chosen will be brutal. Expect every dirty political trick to be pulled out of the Dems’ hats in an attempt to short-circuit the next conservative nominee. The left is seeing its house of cards collapse; leftists never go quietly into that good night – you’ll be able to hear the shrieking from wherever you are.

Just think: these appointments could have been Hillary’s to make. She must be having another meltdown; by now, ol’ Hillary “Fukushima”* Clinton is probably radioactive. Bless her heart.

Next? Look for The Wall/Fence/Barrier to start growing again on our southwest border as Americans increasingly ask for a limit to immigration. With the Supremes’ recent upholding his list of terrorist countries as a valid immigration restriction, The Donald’s on a roll.

Will he gloat?? Does the sun rise in the east?

*edited for accuracy.

23 thoughts on “Elections Have Consequences

  1. Hillary ” Fukuyama ” Clinton ?
    Hillary ” Fukushima ” Clinton ?
    Just Wonderin’

  2. The Donald is doing the job he promised of, slowly but surely, clearing the swamp but the left are doing their normal dirty tricks.
    I still don’t understand why he’s not had [H]illary Clinton arrested.

    • Hi Andy,

      I’m not too sure about the system there but given that The Donald isn’t actually a dictator of any kind he has to follow certain procedural norms I suspect which would exclude Stalinesque action.

      I may be wrong of course.

  3. Another conservative Supreme Court appointment would be good news. But I don’t see it as a game changer. At best it’s a delaying measure, a finger in the dike. What’s necessary to stop a Leftist victory in the US would be an immediate halt to the demographic transformation of the nation. If that’s not accomplished nothing else matters.

    At this point I don’t think it’s possible to stop what’s in the demographic pipeline. Even if all immigration, legal and illegal, were completely halted tomorrow the present demographic composition of the country, combined with current birth rates, results in a white minority within a few decades. That’s baked into the cake.


    I realize a lot of people are not fans of “identity politics”. But whether we like it or not demographics is destiny when it comes to politics. Different groups of people prefer different ways of doing things. In the US Whites are the only group that consistently votes conservative. And by conservative I mean they vote for the form of government their ancestors created.


    When that white demographic in the US gets out-numbered the Republic is over. Latin Americans and Asians don’t lean towards the Anglo-Saxon style of governance. And I don’t say that as a criticism, they too are entitled to live as they choose. I’m only claiming that you can’t change your population and keep your nation.

    Right now the Left can lose all 9 seats on the Supreme Court, see the Wall get completed by the end of the 2018, watch Trump win in 2020 and still go to sleep with a smile on their faces. The immigration ground game they launched in 1965 is all they really needed to win. They just have to wait.

    • I think that if Americans and other Western nations cut harshly on welfare benefits that can be reversed.

    • Perfect post, could not agree with you more. You said it in a nutshell. There really is nothing more to say than this.

    • As Mark Steyn has repeatedly stated, “The future belongs to those who show up for it.”

      Large numbers of people of European descent appear to have (prematurely) given up on the future.

  4. Sadly the Democ[rats] will earnestly try every dirty trick to ‘Bork’ any worthy candidate.

    • But they always do that. It’s a shame that their attacks are often so vicious, but that’s the nature of their philosophy. I’ve no doubt that Trump is well aware of this reality and will prepare accordingly. For example, any candidate he puts forth now will probably be tabled by the Senate until after the November elections. With one-third of the seats up for grabs, the Dems will hold out for a better chance. Just like the Senate tabled Obama’s pick and let it die a natural death as Obama’s term came to an end…

      We’ll have to see how the musical chair game ends up first. Or maybe the current Senate will push it up…

  5. There’s no changing the course of history – at best one can hitch a ride on its back. And Dr Turley is right, cultural Marxist modernism has run out of steam – the reality of its fantasy is not the utopia that it had us believe it was going to be.

  6. I have enough trouble comprehending the politics of my native Britain, let alone the US system. Anyway, fools rush in…

    I believe it’s unhealthy for any nation for one party to be in power for too long; I’m sure we could all find examples from one-party dictatorships (secular and tribal/religious), and even some democracies; it encourages corruption, abuse of power, complacency and arrogance. While a good case could be made that the “left” has had it too much its own way in many democracies for too long, at least the people do get the chance to throw the bastards out, and some nations show an increasing tendency to do so.

    The US Supreme Court is a more problematic case, since its members are appointed, often for decades. While it may be healthy for the US (and the world) to have a genuinely Republican President for a time, and very salutary for the Democrats to be knocked off their moral high horse for a while, perpetuating a particular set of values for decades (as has, arguably, been the case with the current SCOTUS) seems to me dangerously divisive, whichever party does it. Dr Turley should contain his glee; if he gets his wish, in future the Democrats may have stronger grounds for feeling disenfranchised than they do at present, for all their vituperation.

    • I think you have a very good point. The Supreme Court justices are like the Pope: he needs a bit of time in office to effect changes, but after awhile, one pope in office too long becomes a bit stale.

      My opinion is that when the 2016 election cycle began, the swamp and donors intended for Jeb Bush to get the nomination and the Presidency. Philosophically, he’s not that different from Hillary, he’s every bit as beholden to the money interests as Hillary, and switching parties in power keeps both party establishments beholden to the donors.

      Once Trump got the Republican nomination, everyone rolled their eyes and assumed Hillary would win the election (in a landslide). She’s not the brightest, nor the most competent, nor the most energetic, nor the easiest to get along with, but she was thoroughly responsive to donors, which was what counted to them in the long run. Hillary also assumed she was a shoo-in, which accounts for her still-palpable anger and shock on losing the position she felt belonged to her once Trump got the nomination.

      I think she would have been somewhat gracious on losing to a Jeb Bush. She would be counting on Jeb to appoint her to an honorary commission or two to keep the funds flowing to the Clinton Foundation and its mutated offspring.

      • What’s wrong with a “stale” Pope heading an institution as old as the Catholic Church? What’s the benefit of “fresh”?

        The removal of Pope Benedict (that hadn’t been done since the 11th century) was a crying shame. Neither the Church nor the world has benefitted from his successor.

    • Mark, your country is dissolving and we’re all watching, appalled as civil liberties disappear. Your welfare state has been cannibalized by immigrant hordes who don’t like Brits and have no plans to assimilate. You have no one to throw out, really, because Tweedledee-Dum is just a game of musical chairs. Meanwhile, thanks to p.c. immigration, crime rates in London are beginning to surpass ours; no Brit has a way to defend himself against the onslaught. It’s depressing to see how disarming a populace works out in the long term.

      As for the Supremes, their long tenures provide a kind of stability to the three branches of government. The president can only last eight years, the House of Representatives has to face re-election every two years, and the Senate every six. Many Americans would much prefer term limits on Congress than they would the Supreme Court.

      • I think what I’m really saying is that it’s a bad idea for senior judiciary to be appointed by politicians.

        Regarding the state of things in London, a few weeks ago Pat Condell carried a video clip of an Afro-Caribbean man from London, formerly a gang leader. He said the increase in knife crime is due to the migrants from the DRC and Somalia, both war zones; these are young men who have been exposed to mayhem and murder, sometimes of their own families, and will stab you juat for looking at them the wrong way.
        The state of the UK is depressing indeed, yet every time I’m on a bus crossing the Thames (at least four times a week) I look up from my reading to enjoy the view, which is part of why I stay.

      • In the UK, unless there is a huge, grassroots mass revolt, we are doomed. Precisely because, unlike the US, we have no checks on the power of our politicians. Our elections make no difference whatsoever, as first-past-the-post voting only works in the favour of Labour and Tories, therefore not giving the smaller parties any means of influence. UKIP has an astonishing number of votes in in the 2015 election – 12.6%!! – and not a single seat!! No one other than hard core lefties, SJWs, and islamists make it their resolution to turn out and vote in large numbers – with exception of the tory-voting blue rinse brigade, which is now dying out. Therefore, the country will become less and less big C Conservative. Yes, there is still UKIP, For Britain, and some other right-wing fringe parties, but the voting system works entirely against them, and, on top of that, the Right in the UK has no intellectual, philosophical or moral coherence at the moment. It is rudderless, run by under-educated but well-meaning Brits who can’t really string a sentence together and have no credibility whatsoever in the media. The right also has a tendency to be full of loonies who struggle with a long-term, political vision and, more importantly, sound economic ideas. Yes, we do want less immigration BUT NOT MORE WELFARE! Anne-Marie Waters seems to be going in the right direction, but the whole feel of For Britain has the usual slap-dash, loony-bin design to it.

        We neither have any checks on our politicised judiciary, and the executive has already been described by the late Lord Hailsham an ‘elective dictatorship’. Just look at the scale of shite Thatcher and Blair have inflicted on this country.

        And don’t get me started on the EU…

        The core problem is the we are now so infantilised, emasculated and under-educated, more and more people cannot envisage leading independent lives without the steering of politicians, who in turn create bigger problems, i.e. immigration and supporting Islamism. You cannot lead an independent life away from the state, whilst Islamism and third -world immigration continue unabated.

        Sadly, not sure what the solution is other than reaching socio-political rock bottom and fighting it out the hard way.

      • I forgot to say that the Supreme Court justices are chosen by the Executive branch but have to be passed by the Legislative branch – in this case, specifically the Senate.

        The problem with American politics is the same beast that strides through Europe: an unaccountable Administrative State.


        In all, there are about 2 million drones in the government. Each would say his/her/its job is crucial. But the real problem is the federal pension system…the whole thing is a house of cards. Right now they’re stable but it wouldn’t take much…

Comments are closed.