I think his appeal is rooted in the fact people are fed up with PC nannies looking to police your every word for esoteric signs of super secret bigotry

Sure, that's true, but obviously Trump's base of support is much wider than that, and includes:

* people sick of foreign wars
* people who distrust the establishment
* people sick of politicians being bought by special interest groups
* people concerned about terrorist attacks, immigration, and the required surveillance state to deal with this
* people sick of morality being imposed by the government

Ultimately Trump's appeal is that he flat out says what a lot of people believe - that the people running the country aren't doing a good job and then he calls them out at every chance.

A Trump White House could hardly be worse than the last two, G.W./Obama. Here in the Northwest I find it interesting that I've never read or heard a positive story about The Donald. From NPR to FOX, the Seattle Times, South Sound Tribune, the local radio stations. It's like he's political heroin or something.
NPR's Tom Cocaine is one of the worst. The only good thing they ever report is that he keeps winning - and it drives them nuts.

Trump has been uncannily "correct" in his "outlandish" statements.

Saying we need to temporarily stop Muslim migration to ensure we are vetting them properly JUST BEFORE we find out that social media was not being reviewed in our vetting process (San Bernadino shooter) solely for PC reasons. Our safety was not deemed important enough to weather any harsh publicity. (I mean DAMN!)

Saying we need a wall to control our border (all people hear is "control our border") when Israel has a wall and BEFORE the EU agrees to send all migrants back to Turkey because the mass migration is not working out.

While acknowledging that hundreds of thousands of voters have chosen him and that there "could be riots" if the establishment picked a non-runner instead of him JUST BEFORE Bernie/Clinton voting protesters were violently disrupting/preventing Trump voters to attend/listen his rallies. (It's his fault that the other party's followers are being violently disrupted. #BLM can call for dead cops now but Trump has a language problem?

Trump being hard on terrorists BEFORE the PC correct practices of Brussels come back to haunt them. (Brussels knows the guys are there in the neighborhood they were born in, knows they are "bad guys" (believe one killed a cop and got 9 years w/less for good behavior), has one in custody but does not ask "where are the other explosives", and so on.)

The only ones not noticing that his statements are being proven right are die-hard libs/Dems who really do think that more socialist practices are needed (could be right but the "packaging messages" are really being mishandled); and that the fly-over and mining parts of America are racist out-of-touch religious gun-toting rubes. (Never mind that they feed/fed and built America and now between the EPA and trade agreements they are unemployed.)

Houston, we have problems.

"He may be detestable, but so long as cocooned elites ignore the anxiety he has channeled, he will keep winning."

That is why Bo & Ben go so far offbase -- because their starting point is. And their collection of facile, superficial stereotypes betrays them as snobs spitting on the very people they here feign sympathy with.

To me, this article, and the comments so far, miss the biggest part of Trump's appeal: he's the only one running for President who does not want the Syrian and North African refugees coming into this country.

The rest of them, Republican and Democrat, turn a deaf ear to the concerns of the American people. The Muslim refugees are rapidly turning Western Europe into a hellish rape society (a real rape culture; not what third-wave feminists think is a rape culture), with their absolutely fascinating inability keep their hands to themselves and think it's perfectly reasonable to force themselves on women and children when experiencing their "sexual emergencies."

"What's that?" Rubio, Clinton, Sanders, Cruz, Kasich, et al. seem to be saying. "You want us to let Syrian and North African refugees [most of which are actually males of fighting age] into the country by the millions? Okay, we'll do that."

No. We really, really, really do not want them here. And yes, it really is that important. The preservation of our society depends on it.

I wouldn jump head first into the Winegards' piece. It's pretty shallow. It reads like another "You unwashed, illiterate rubes in Flyover Country just don't know better" piece by folks who think only talking to people who all share the same opinions they do is analysis. Thinking that people in Kentucky vote Republican is the first erroneous assumption. In the past 40 years only two Republican Governors have been elected. The first was defeated for re-election, and the current one who may repeat that. In recent special elections, Democrats won 3 of 4 state House of Representatives seats.

No, many, maybe most people there are FDR Democrats, on whom Obama and Hillary have declared war. Shutting down all fossil fuels, coal and fracking, shuts down mining, power generation, aluminum refining, automobile manufacturing and a lot of farming. There's no trust of Republicans, but, guess what - The Donald isn't a Republican, he just shows up for their debates. The result is the most traditional Republicans don't support him, but a lot of traditional Democrats switch to vote for him. What he's doing is stirring the pot. Against that, the leading Democrat's main claim is that for a woman to succeed, she has to be a doormat for a man who'll publicly wipe his feet on throughput what passes for their marriage. These are interesting times.

Trump is a buffoon. Really he is.

Hillary is someone I would NEVER vote for. Never.

As for the other GOP candidates, yea, I might have liked a couple of them. Trump would not have been someone I would prefer. Really, would NOT. There is plenty I do NOT like about him.

Starting with his narcissism for one; 8 years of Obama's narcissism was more than enough for me. Obama picking fights with news networks was bad enough; Trump will pick fights with individual news reporters! So, childish.

However, aside from the stupid stereotypes, that article does get right a couple of reasons for Trump's popularity.

As for myself, I originally thought I might, for the first time ever, not vote. But, I am - GASP! - slowly coming around to not mind voting for Trump.

My reason is quite simple - the more the MSM jumps on hate Trump, the more other GOP candidates trash him; the more I'm liking the guy. Especially since it is so obvious that their claims against him are so wrong. (e.g., claiming Trump rallies are violent when, in fact, it is the anti-Trumpers showing up to his rallies with violent intentions that are the cause of the violence. Stick your middle finger in my face, I just might sucker punch you too!)

If the group that Peggy Noonan accurately calls the "Protect Class" is getting their knickers all in a wad because of him then there is something that I like about him - give the "elites" something to sweat about for a change. They have, for decades, been pissing on our legs and telling us it is rain. Time for Trump to piss on them and tell them it's piss!

I couldn't read all of that. The bigotry and prejudice was pretty obvious and the ignorance was too strong. It sounds like the Winegards need to take their own advice and "Instead of mocking Trump's supporters, it would be useful (and morally decent) to understand them and their complaints."

Trump is a classic Dixiecrat. He is representing a number of people pushed out of the Democrat party. A key part of his support is people who traditionally vote Democrat and have now switched over to Republican. What Wfjag says is 100% true. Additionally, Trump's willingness to fight back against the Democrats is a huge draw from the Republican side. It turns off the cerebral Republicans but it really enchants the rest. The PC mess that has been forced down most people's throats is hitting a tipping point.

The truth is Trump is building a new coalition in the Republican party. Can he win with it? I don't know. If he does win with it is that coalition stable? I don't know. But this is a major change from what came before it so the polling and historical indicators aren't working too well.

Charles: Stick your middle finger in my face, I just might sucker punch you too!

I usually agree with you, Charles, but unfortunately, as John McGraw found out, that is not sufficient provocation to resort to violence. And if you did such a thing, you would meet the same fate as McGraw. Trust me, long after the gratification of sucker punching someone in the face had worn off, you would still be on probation and still paying for the "privilege."

I personally don't think it would be worth it.

Besides, from what I could see on the footage, Rakeem Jones was not sticking up his middle finger at anyone. At least, not while he was being quietly escorted out by the police, when he was attacked by McGraw. (What Jones was doing before that, I don't know.)

I'm a little surprised that you would voice support for such a despicable act, and resort to blaming the victim in this case. John McGraw has no one to blame but himself for his arrest. There is no legal justification for his actions. Or moral justification, for that matter.

Simply put, both Trump and Bernie supporters have identical messages, albeit from far different viewpoints:

The oh-so-comfortable Establishment must be destroyed, utterly. . .

"Voters who are well integrated into the mediating institutions of society don't buy what Trump is selling."

Well, isn't this the cutest little definition of buying into PC BS?

In sum, if you HAVE a job in an area that hasn't been blighted, AND you don't mind that the employers of illegal aliens get a totally free pass for violating DHS regulations, you think, "somebody else's problem" and go to the mall, unencumbered by the thought process.

Very few of these pieces are ready to take the Big Step.

It always comes out as Them Trump voters ain't sophistomicated ennuff.

Almost none have the balls to say We have failed our brother citizens and taxpayers.

Crid, yeah, the Republican establishment is 100% focused on how to undermine Trump, and zero focused on how they alienated their base in the first place.

@Ben,

Definitively. This article felt like your average Gawker/Vox Media article but without the curse words. Any more pretentious and it'll have a permanent exhibit at the MoMA.

I've heard there are black Trump supporters, but not many.

What I wonder is, how do poor BLACK people feel about illegals and how and why do they vote as a result? Does the article not mention them at all? If not, why? Something's odd.

If not, why
doesn't fit the narrative

Don't know about black people, but here is Thomas Sowell's take on the current situ:

http://townhall.com/columnists/thomassowell/2012/06/12/socialist_or_fascist/page/full

Peaceful minorities terrified as white people rampage and kill one young man.

Wait. Let me check that video again.

This article would have benefited from some data, but then it would have had to abandon the narrative that Trumps support comes primarily from 'lower White' Americans, or traditional Republicans for that matter.

IMO Ben is right - polling indicates that Trump is drawing from the same populist base that used to be associated w/ the Dixiecrats. These people aren't poor uneducated Whites, they're typically middle class and many of his supporters aren't White.

Candidates like Trump arise when their is a crisis of legitimacy in the major parties. The Republicans and Democrats no longer represent the interests of the public. They've become insular and bigoted, and largely out of touch. I'd never vote for Trump, but I understand why people might, if only to spit in the eye of the 'elite' political and media classes.

"Almost none [of these pieces] have the balls to say We have failed our brother citizens and taxpayers."

I agree completely Crid. I think the left, in particular bears responsibility here.

You ever read Joe Bageant?

Oh, another " the poor ignorant fearful dears just don't KNOW better" piece to explain why people like Trump. You know what? I sure as hell hope he wins. I'm so sick of elitist idiots thinking that if the rest of us were just educated (brainwashed) enough, we'd think like they do.

@ momof4,

I'm hoping for Hillary to lose to Trump just to see all those glorified Mainstream Media "journalists" throw a hissy fit.

I can't get past his misogyny. If he has any females in offices of leadership I fully believe he will never listen to anything any of them have to say. The way he has brought the wives into the fight with Ted Cruz is appalling. I would never want my president to act like that. It's not dignified what's going on in this race. Trump can't handle women telling him what to do at all - when you refer to Megyn Kelly as having "blood coming out of her wherever," you're really at a base level of humanity. Who says that? Publicly? He will be an embarrassment of epic proportions and I can't get in that circus and vote for him.

I've heard there are black Trump supporters, but not many.

I've heard there are a hell of a lot of them. Haven't seen any scientific polls on the subject, but my source is an actual working class black woman.

Win or lose, in the general election I expect Trump to get a larger share of the black vote than any Republican since WWII. I can't wait to see how the talking heads react to that.

Rex, IF that happens, someone, somewhere, will say that it has to do in part with Trump's not being a real Republican in the first place. I just don't know who will say that. (Certainly, Republicans themselves won't want to say this.)

But in the meantime, I can't quite imagine what black Trump supporters are thinking - it reminds me of the amazement I feel whenever I see a black Mormon, if you know what I mean. (This is spelled out slightly in the musical "The Book of Mormon," but all you really need to do is Google. I think I first heard of the Mormons' awful record in that regard when I read Hitchens' "god Is Not Great.")

Not to mention black students at Bob Jones University. So the dating rules have been changed since 2000 - so what? That doesn't change the founder's legacy any.

I should have said Bob Jones "University."

gooseegg at March 26, 2016 1:51 PM

>I can't get past his misogyny. If he has any
>females in offices of leadership I fully believe
>he will never listen to anything any of them have
>to say. The way he has brought the wives into the
>fight with Ted Cruz is appalling. I would never
>want my president to act like that. It's not
>dignified what's going on in this race. Trump
>can't handle women telling him what to do at all -
>when you refer to Megyn Kelly as having "blood
>coming out of her wherever," you're really at a
>base level of humanity. Who says that? Publicly?

Trump attacks men and women all the time, not just women.

Trump is very textbook. He attacks women on looks and sexuality. He attacks men on power (ie calling Jeb Bush weak). That's the kind of attack that is going to hurt the most.

And, sorry to say this, but while Kentucky and similar states have been the butt of jokes for decades, the fact that Kentucky became home to the Creation Museum in 2007 and not, say, 1907 really doesn't help...

Re: Sowell article

Back in the 1920s, however, when fascism was a new political development, it was widely -- and correctly -- regarded as being on the political left. Jonah Goldberg's great book "Liberal Fascism" cites overwhelming evidence of the fascists' consistent pursuit of the goals of the left, and of the left's embrace of the fascists as one of their own during the 1920s.

Mussolini, the originator of fascism, was lionized by the left, both in Europe and in America, during the 1920s. Even Hitler, who adopted fascist ideas in the 1920s, was seen by some, including W.E.B. Du Bois, as a man of the left.

Mussolini's fascists used a bundle of sticks as their symbol. The word, fasces, comes from the Latin word for bundle. It represented that as individuals people were weak, but collectively they were strong. Mussolini's fascism was, like socialism, a collectivist ideology. It came from an ancient Etruscan symbol of authority that the Romans later adopted.

That Hitler was anti-communist is how he ended up being associated with the right. He represented himself to the world as the only thing standing between Western Europe and a communist infiltration directed by a rapacious Soviet Union.

===================================

Very few of these pieces are ready to take the Big Step.

It always comes out as Them Trump voters ain't sophistomicated ennuff.

Almost none have the balls to say We have failed our brother citizens and taxpayers.

Crid at March 26, 2016 10:25 AM

And none of them have the balls to point out that the voters themselves kept returning to office the politicians who continually failed them.

I passed that museum not long ago. I thought, "what a great place for a golf course."

> I can't get past his misogyny.

I can't argue with that.

Well, I can argue about anything, but the point is I'd lose, because you're indisputably right. His ideas about women are primitive and hurtful.

But consider that we've never seen any behavior from this guy that you wouldn't expect from a seventh- or eighth-grader... The taunting and name-calling, the insistence that others are losers, the endless appeals to fairness.

To call his behavior misogynist is to flatter him. He's not personally advanced enough to offend a woman in the manner of a grown man.

(Neither is ISIS, but they too are a hazard that modern society will need to negotiate, though perhaps not negotiate with.)

> And none of them have the
> balls to point out that the
> voters themselves kept returning
> to office the politicians who
> continually failed them.

That's a fun thing to say, but "voters" might no longer be said to represent the opinion of the best, or even the thoughtful participatory majority, of the American population... See also "taxpayers."

As in tax code and regulatory law, there's a thicket of exceptions and particulars and exclusions to make sure certain things happen for people who pull certain levers... "Superdelagates" being perhaps the best example of the season.

But examples are everywhere you look.





I've been waiting for someone much, much brighter than me to crystallize the thought and write it out longhand.

Civilization has reached a bottleneck because human consciousness imagines no finer way to make things happen than through governmental power... Meaning, for people around the globe, the power of the United States government specifically. (The far greater source of wealth, dignity and longevity over the past two hundreds years was capitalism, but human beings are by nature disinterested in ventures which involve toil, feedback and personal sacrifice.) But our government people are no better morally than any other human beings. Their first use of their authority and responsibilities is to pursue their own best interests and those of their loved ones. They cannot beheld accountable, and they know it.

Until humanity figures out a way to make all government workers, without exception, personally accountable and competitive in their performance, we're screwed.

Saying 'Throw the bums out!' doesn't help, or it would have helped by now.

I can't quite imagine what black Trump supporters are thinking

I can. First of all, for all the blather about Trump's "racism", what has he said that was actually racist (as defined by normal people, not professional race-baiters and SJWs)?

Second, who is (as a group) hurt most by mass immigration from Mexico and Central America? Who is the only candidate, from either party, who clearly wants to end said immigration?

Conservatives gave the House to Republicans in 2010 and we got nothing for it. Nothing.

We gave them the Senate in 2014 and got nothing for it. Nothing.

In John Roberts we got a goddam idiot who thinks something can simultaneously be a tax and a penalty, whichever way is needed for Obamacare to prevail.

Paul Ryan became speaker and THE FIRST THING HE DID was give Obama 100% of what he wanted, budget-wise.

Republican politicians lie and lie and lie and lie and lie and lie about restraining government, cutting spending, and all that.

We want someone who will FIGHT THE HELL BACK.

THIS is why Trump + Cruz is something like 75% of the primary vote. Not racism for Chrissake.

Toon.

Maybe it's what he DIDN'T say, right away (re David Duke) that made him look pretty darn untrustworthy at best when it came to condemning racism in general?

Here's more on what may be happening:

http://www.theroot.com/articles/politics/2016/03/the_donald_trump_effect_black_voters_influence_republican_primaries_with.html

Elsewhere, a black female commentator claimed that both Trump and Sanders are condescending to black voters.

@lenona - Looks like you're looking for reasons not to support Trump. There are many, but at least pick valid ones. He did disavow Duke, several times. Funny that about the same time, Hillary was endorsed by a KKK leader, but wasn't asked to disavow the endorsement (and should not have been; it's a non-issue for either of them). As for a black, female commentator's belief that The Donald and The Bern are condescending, did she also mention the times that Hillary saw fit to address black audiences using a Yankee's fake version of a Field Hand Darkie accent? ("Eyes sooo tiied. Eyes sooo wirry." Maybe that's how she addressed black folk as First Lady of Arkansas?). While The Donald can certainly be a bit of an a$$, his accent never changes. Everything is always "Yuuugggeee!" (Yes, with all his $Billions, I do wish he'd spend a few $Bucks on a Diction Coach).

@lenona - Looks like you're looking for reasons not to support Trump. There are many, but at least pick valid ones. He did disavow Duke, several times. Funny that about the same time, Hillary was endorsed by a KKK leader, but wasn't asked to disavow the endorsement (and should not have been; it's a non-issue for either of them). As for a black, female commentator's belief that The Donald and The Bern are condescending, did she also mention the times that Hillary saw fit to address black audiences using a Yankee's fake version of a Field Hand Darkie accent? ("Eyes sooo tiied. Eyes sooo wirry." Maybe that's how she addressed black folk as First Lady of Arkansas?). While The Donald can certainly be a bit of an a$$, his accent never changes. Everything is always "Yuuugggeee!" (Yes, with all his $Billions, I do wish he'd spend a few $Bucks on a Diction Coach).

Bobo,

I'm not the first to make the Dixiecrat connection. Cousin Dave pointed it out to me and I've seen a few other people notice it as well since then. Aside from Trump being a norther Democrat he seems to fit the Dixiecrat mold perfectly.

Lenona,

The David Duke stuff is pretty manufactured. Have you actually read any of the stories instead of just catching the headlines? Which is kind of sad since Trump does lie all the time and blatantly. He isn't quite as bad as Hillary but in a dishonesty race he is a close second. So why this David Duke lie had to be made up I have no idea.

On Trump and Sanders being condescending to blacks, meh. They are politicians. What else is new? Hillary is the most condescending. Mainly because she needs those black voters.

As for polls on black's views, good luck finding any. The Democrats desperately don't want that published. They are well aware the Democrat party as a whole's values and the majority of black's values are not compatible. But they need the black vote to win elections.

Bernie takes three states from Clinton.

I'm hoping its gonna be a free for all at BOTH conventions!

THIS is why Trump + Cruz is something like 75% of the primary vote. Not racism for Chrissake.

Politics has always been about compromise of some sort. Even Saint Ronnie compromised, and even he got rolled a couple times for it.

The problem both parties are having today is that their bases view compromise of any sort as selling out and failure.

Both parties are imploding from a base hardened against anything that smacks of the other side having any say in government.

Like Gog, I'm hoping for a knock down drag out fight at both conventions. The parties and their bases deserve no less than utter chaos.

> Like Gog, I'm hoping for a knock
> down drag out fight at both
> conventions. The parties and
> their bases deserve no less
> than utter chaos.

Well, now, you guys are not consid









Okay.

Crid writes: "Until humanity figures out a way to make all government workers, without exception, personally accountable and competitive in their performance, we're screwed."

I often disagree with Crid, but he is right on target with this.

"The problem both parties are having today is that their bases view compromise of any sort as selling out and failure."

I'm not sure the GOP knows who their base is right now. I've been rather stunned at some of the movement conservatives' reaction to, not just Trump himself, but to his audience. I want to grab them by the shoulders and get in their face and tell them, This is the audience you've been trying to reach for the past twenty years!. (And it goes way beyond rural white males.) Their visceral reaction to the populism has blocked them from putting together the coalition that could win. Admittedly, there are some philosophical differences that would have to be overcome. But both groups should be united by their opposition to leftism. Instead, the movement conservatives are allowing themselves to drift into the elitist camp. Doing so might eliminate conservatism as a force in American politics, as things realign to the elitist/populist spectrum that is coming. Reagan is spinning in his grave.

Until humanity figures out a way to make all government workers, without exception, personally accountable and competitive in their performance, we're screwed.

Crid, you may enjoy Niall Ferguson's The Great Degeneration.

http://www.amazon.com/The-Great-Degeneration-Institutions-Economies/dp/0143125524/ref=pd_sim_14_5?ie=UTF8&refRID=1NRZYFJX9H9NMEFBGFEC

"The Great Degeneration is an incisive indictment of an era of negligence and complacency—and to arrest the breakdown of our civilization, Ferguson warns, will take heroic leadership and radical reform."

Cousin Dave,

I'm not sure who you are talking about. But I think I agree with you anyways.

The GOP leadership are one group. And honestly they are really Democrat-lite (same great taste and half the calories, or something). They know who their base is, but they despise them. These people prefer Trump to Cruz.

Then there are the conservative philosophers like National Review. These people viscerally hate Trump because he is a leftist (just not as strong of one as Obama). They rally around Cruz.

In the end you can't be all things to all people. The real question is can Trump form a big enough tent to win? And if so can that tent stand long enough for someone else to win after Trump is out of office? I don't know.

The GOP started as a left-wing party based in the Northeast (Lincoln would be a Democrat today). The original GOP argued for a stronger (and more intrusive) federal government and higher tariffs (back then, the only way government could raise revenue). In time, it became a pro-capitalism (anti-Communism) party that supported specific (rather than general) social reforms. The American prep class found it's political home in the Republican Party.

Teddy Roosevelt, Richard Nixon, Herbert Hoover, and George HW Bush are classic examples of the big government Republican establishment. George W. Bush blended it with evangelicalism, but was a card-carrying member of the establishment.

Then, the Dixiecrats and evangelicals were driven out of the Democratic Party and took up residence in the Republican Party, attracted by anti-communism and Barry Goldwater's message of fiscal (though not social) conservatism. Goldwater actually despised the evangelicals and warned against their gaining sway in Republican politics.

Goldwater had rebelled against the big government spending policies of his party comrades and was snubbed by the establishment Republicans for it. His brand of Western small government populism didn't sit well in Northeastern US Republican drawing rooms.

Despite the Goldwater Republicans' success in nominating Ronald Reagan, the liberal wing of the Party (Rockefeller Republicans) retained the overall party leadership - and sneered at the new working class Republicans attracted by Goldwater and Reagan. Republican presidential candidates spoke the language of fiscal conservatism to get the votes, but did not practice what they preached once in office.

Reagan won the presidency on a coalition of the liberals, evangelicals, and fiscal conservatives. That coalition died with George HW Bush (a Yalie, a preppy, and a card-carrying member of the Republican establishment, despite his claims to the contrary).

Without conservatives and having lost non-union working class America, the Democratic Party swung hard left.

As a result, the American political landscape is basically, a left-wing socialist party (Democrats) claiming to be a moderate left-of-center party, a moderate left-of-center party (Republicans) claiming to be a right-wing fiscally conservative Constitutionalist party, and a group of fiscal and social conservatives searching for lost glory and looking for party. In desperation, the politically ignored are embracing xenophobia and extremism. In short, we've become Europe.

Conan: In short, we've become Europe.

Except that we carry guns and have free speech.

"Except that we carry guns and have free speech."

For how much longer? Put Garland on the Supreme Court and both of those are toast.

Except that we carry guns and have free speech. ~ Patrick at March 28, 2016 5:07 PM

Try speaking your mind on a university campus. Or carrying a gun in Boston.

Besides, Europeans claim they have free speech. In their mind, only hate speech is restricted. It's the definition of hate speech that keeps getting tighter.

And they once had guns.

Britain began its slide into gun control with the Firearms Act of 1920. Over the years, each new violent act (Hungerford, Dunblane, etc.) prompted a new and tighter gun control law. Yet, for all its gun control, Britain is one of the most violent countries in Europe.

Meanwhile on the continent, a people weary of near-constant warfare and violence (including anarchist and terrorist violence) decided the best way to ensure the peace was to disarm the citizenry. As recent events in Paris and Brussels show, violence does not end with gun control.

Crid writes: "Until humanity figures out a way to make all government workers, without exception, personally accountable and competitive in their performance, we're screwed."

Heh. A complete turnaround from September 2011.