November 20, 2016


Sorry Democrats, But Americans Are Remarkably Tolerant People (David Harsanyi, NOVEMBER 16, 2016, The Federalist)

[T]o say there's been a 67 percent surge in bias crimes against Muslims between 2014 and 2015 is factual but incomplete. To put the number in perspective, let's remember that in a nation of around 330 million people there were a total of 257 criminal incidents -- perpetrated by 228 offenders (not every police department reports hate crimes, but most do) -- that officials determined were motivated by anti-Muslim sentiment.

Victims of a hate crime suffer in ways that most of us can't comprehend. Some of these crimes were deadly serious. Most were misdemeanors, however. Among them were acts like vandalism, simple assault (assault that does involve physical contact), and intimidation. None of these crimes are tolerable, and the perpetrators should be fully prosecuted, shamed, and rejected by all decent Americans.

In any event, these numbers, flawed or not, hardly align with the hysterics we've been hearing from the Left these past few years. Hate crimes are a blip when we consider all criminal activity. Even if these numbers were quadrupled, they would still be a blip.

I already know what's coming: But how about this incident! And how about this one! Look what this one said!

No rational person would deny that racists and bigots exist. Believe it or not, as a Jew myself, this election cycle isn't the first time my background has been attacked. When you start likening contemporary political officials to Nazis, though, I tend to think you're shortchanging the people who decimated my family back in the Old Country.

It's also undeniable that over the past year some legitimately worrisome voices have found footing with Republicans. Maybe Steve Bannon is going to be bad news. I wasn't too crazy about Obama nominating someone who claimed her favorite political philosopher was Mao, either. Still, there was no Great Leap Forward.

If you believe one side is normalizing extremism, think about this: Rep. Keith Ellison, a guy whose political career was launched as a member the anti-Semitic and racist Nation of Islam, and who is one of the most radically left-wing members of Congress, may soon be running the DNC. Just juxtapose the stories and rhetoric surrounding Bannon and Ellison. Only one is treated as if he's outside the norm.

In the minds of many, the only reason someone could be critical of Ellison is that he's an African-American Muslim. Democrats have become so fixated on race and identity that they're unable to imagine anything else could matter. Hannah Arendt once wrote that Western intellectuals had adopted one of Communism's most effective tactics: they made all debate about motive rather than the merits of the argument. This outlook has consumed the American Left.

Is there any contemporary political dispute today that doesn't come down to accusing conservatives of harboring deep-seated motives about race or sex? Some (and I really, feel uncomfortable calling them "liberals" anymore) have convinced themselves Trump's victory confirms that half the country is made up of white supremacists -- as if voting and governance were that simple.

In truth, the reason racism is treated as a grievous social sin is because it is so rare and intolerable in everyday discourse. 

Not only did less than half the country vote for Donald, many of those who did view him unfavorably and think he's unsuited to the office and most oppose his immigration "plans."  It's just not a hateful country, except on the Left and the Right.

Trump's Voters Don't Support Deportation (William Saletan, 11/09/16, Slate)

4. Dislike of Trump wasn't enough to sink him. Each candidate won virtually all the voters who had a favorable opinion of that candidate. Clinton's favorable rating was higher, so she came out ahead. But 18 percent of voters had a favorable opinion of neither candidate, and those voters broke for Trump, 49 percent to 29 percent. That made the difference. Given a choice between two candidates they didn't like, they picked the outsider.

5. Bad temperament wasn't enough to sink Trump. Forty-three percent of voters said Clinton lacked "the temperament to serve effectively as president." A much higher number, 63 percent, said the same of Trump. That was expected to be a big advantage for Clinton. But while Clinton won only 5 percent of the 43 percent who flunked her temperament, Trump won 20 percent of the 63 percent who flunked his. So Trump came out well ahead. Many voters saw that his temperament was bad, but voted for him anyway. [...]

8. Trump's voters didn't support deportation. They agreed with him about building a wall on the Mexican border. But when they were asked whether "most illegal immigrants" should be deported or "offered a chance to apply for legal status," 53 percent chose legal status.

Posted by at November 20, 2016 9:12 AM