By editorial board • 

Voters tell establishment politics to take a hike

 On Tuesday, America threw a desperation Hail Mary when it elected Donald Trump 45th president of the United States.

He will be the first who never held a government job or served in the military prior to moving into the White House. And he enters having presented few if any actual policy initiatives — just promises to somehow make America great again. 

The campaign had little time for policies. For many, that just sounds like confusing political jargon anyway.

It was all about the mood of the electorate. In the end, it took the advice of a celebrity with an ego as massive as his bank account: “What do you have to lose?”
Topping the list of elements tipping the scales was anti-establishment sentiment. It started growing early in primaries, giving rise not only to Trump on the Republican side, but also populist Bernie Sanders on the Democratic side.

While some voters passionately backed either Clinton or Trump, a majority were left to hold their noses. In the end, in part because of last-minute releases reminding voters of the former secretary of state’s establishment misdeeds, the electorate rejected what it considered politics as usual. 

Similar themes were sounded in local races for the state House of Representatives. 

We wonder how Ken Moore would have fared in District 24 without a massive investment by the Democratic Party of Oregon, which played every card it had available and still came up well short — again.

Moore was aided by party stalwarts, including U.S. Sen. Jeff Merkley, Oregon House Speaker Tina Kotek, U.S. Rep. Suzanne Bonamici and State Treasurer-Elect Tobias Read. “So much star power these past few days!” read the final pre-election comment posted on the Moore for Oregon Facebook page.

But he was dogged by unfounded and unfair attack ads launched by the party on his behalf. The attempt to tar his opponent caused many former supporters to switch allegiances.

In contrast, Republican Ron Noble maintained a far greater degree of party independence, even ducking the GOP’s election night watch party in favor of his own. And he remained on the high road with his fliers, ads and commercials, keeping the focus on qualifications and issues.

Though neither candidate could be termed a true political insider, Moore clearly represented establishment politics to a greater extent than Noble, and he was soundly defeated.

The same could be said in neighboring District 23. Former Rep. Jim Thompson was drubbed by incumbent Mike Nearman, whose campaign tied Thompson to Portland liberals and the Cover Oregon debacle, which resonated in the conservative district. 

There is a correlation between the victories of Trump and his predecessor. President Barack Obama inspired a large group of voters who previously felt they were not being heard. It was the same for Trump, only with a different demographic.

America just elected a reality TV star as its commander-in-chief, and the danger began to sink in immediately. But as Obama promised, the sun still rose Wednesday, all the same.


Don Dix

In Hillary's concession speech --

"Our campaign was never about one person or even one election."
From the DNC freezing out Senator Sanders, to those Hillary supporters who felt 'it was her turn', and to the 'experts' that had her winning big, it all seemed to be 'only about one person'. At every turn, the Clinton campaign was confident to smug.

In Sept., Clinton questioned, "Why aren't I 50 points ahead?" And after the election she found the answer -- "We have seen that our nation is more deeply divided than we thought." Duh! All the 1%ers that joined Clinton's appearances only added to that division. Rich people carousing with rich people isn't the image the blue collars want in the presidency.

The simple fact that Clinton's handlers never considered that the blue collars would turn out was the 'silent majority' rejecting 'politics as usual'. Clinton counted on the coasts and large cities to carry the day, and left the middle of the country off the radar. Clinton seemingly felt she was a shoo-in. Big mistake!


Mr. Dix' comments are classic. All about hating Clinton. Nothing about the country. Not a word about the clown they voted for instead.
As usual when "conservatives" win, too many voters decided to cut their throat to spite their noses. As we can already see, "politics as usual" is being replaced with a bad sitcom. All the operators come from the swamp that was supposed to be drained. We'll try to be not too "told you so" as Trump's policies (if they ever deserve the name) hurt mostly those who actually believed him.



I relate to your comments - with profound sadness and trepidation. Our angry fellow Americans have pulled the pin and hurled a grenade into the heart of our country, and the world. Handing this kind of power to this kind of person elevates the United States to the most unstable country on the planet. Just like the passengers in a plane piloted by a madman, we shall all suffer the consequences now.

May God have mercy on us.


Rumpelstilzchen and treefarmer, you seem to present the attitude of those performing the illegal protests by Hillary Clinton supporters in Portland (and other areas). Is this an incorrect inference? Do you hope that a President Donald Trump succeeds as our President?



Mine is a Military family. I have ALWAYS hoped and prayed for the success of America and supported our Presidents regardless of party. However, watching the hateful way the new leader campaigned, listening to his divisive rhetoric and witnessing how it has empowered white supremacists everywhere, knowing that he welcomed and encouraged Russian interference in our election, observing the character of those he is choosing for his cabinet…….well, I have to say that while I still respect the office, I have zero respect for the next occupant. Obviously the man reflects the values of millions of my fellow citizens. He violates every single one of mine.

Not sure where the inference about protesters came from, but let me set the record straight. Unless and until the new leader is able to change it, the right to peaceful assembly is enshrined in our Constitution. Violence and vandalism are crimes. (I assume all of us condemn criminal behavior?) I am not sure the LEGAL protesters we see from coast to coast are demonstrating their support for Hillary Clinton (who actually won the popular vote as irony would have it) as much as they are voicing fear and outrage for the terrifying transformation that has been unleashed on America and the world. More power to them.


treefarmer firstly, I don't like Donald Trump. He disqualified himself in my mind early on. The equally worst candidate ever was Hillary Clinton so it was a very tough election for me.

2) You said, "Unless and until the new leader is able to change it, the right to peaceful assembly is enshrined in our Constitution". I appreciate that you know the difference between "peacefully assemble" and illegally assemble is indicated by the majority of those Hillary Clinton supporters protesting. Surely you must feel compelled to speak out against the illegal protesting which was pretty much everyone in Portland and most other large liberal cities in the U.S. Yet you say, "more power to them"? You are thinking perilously close to the terrible behavior you are so worried about.

3) I have noticed the Democratic talking points is to always mention that Hillary Clinton won the popular vote. So what? That is like saying that whomever gets the most rushing yards, or first downs, or passing yards in a football game wins the game. It just doesn't work that way and liberals/Democrats should understand this by now (after a few centuries).

4) Do you have a problem with some in the media (CNN and MSNBC in particular) continually fomenting the negative 24 hours a day?

5) Are you from the camp that feels all of the anti-muslim problems are all Trumps fault and not influenced by all of the terrorist events of this last year? That is what is attempted to be presented by the losing party.

6) Again, "Do you hope that a President Donald Trump succeeds as our President"?


treefarmer, you said, "Mine is a Military family". I am not sure what you meant by that. Our family is a military family also. For what its worth (probably nothing) I have my Bronze Star awarded for combat in Vietnam.



It seems we have Vietnam in common……trying times! I thank you most sincerely for your service. My reference was not meant to offend or challenge, just a statement of respect for America.

You sure ask a lot of questions. Here are my answers for what they are worth:

1) Millions of us can agree that the choices sucked. We were all stuck with the lesser of two evils. I held my nose and voted for the one I thought was less likely to destroy our democracy and humiliate us on the world stage.

2) I am pretty sure I actually do understand the concept of peaceful assembly. As mentioned above, I do not believe that supporting Clinton is the goal of the protesters, I think most (not all) have no intention to break the law, they just want to exercise their First Amendment rights. I definitely worry about and condemn ANY form of rioting or violence. There was a report on the local news about a large peaceful family-oriented demonstration in Beaverton Saturday. More power to ALL citizens peacefully exercising their rights in a lawful manner.

3) Regardless of the Electoral College system, winning the majority of the popular vote is not a talking point. It is not spin. It is a fact. A new President was duly elected but his election does not represent the majority of American voters.

4) No doubt we all have a problem with the press. They played a big role in our current situation. I guess you must not watch Fox, but negativity notwithstanding, we need the press, now more than ever, so we all better hope they get their act together. No free press, no accountability = kiss freedom good bye.

5) Anti-Muslim sentiment was just one more useful tool to stoke fear and rile up the base. I have never read anything that remotely suggests the candidate CAUSED it. (If you want to post a source, I would be glad to read it.)

6) He has signaled his intention to institute policies I regard as un-Constitutional. It would not be possible for me to hope for that.


Thank you for your perspectives. It is my feeling that much of the commentary is bypassing the what I think is the real reason for the election of Donald Trump. It was more than just Donald Trump ... it was a rejection of liberal/progressive thought that many felt was being "jammed down their throats". The election of Donald Trump was just the "tip of the iceberg". There are twice as many Republican governors, Obama lost a great amount of support in both the U.S. Senate and House, there was an erosion of over 800 state office holders during the Obama Administration. This is extremely significant and has left the Republican Party in its strongest position since the 1920s.

This was not an election about the economic status of people as liberals/progressives have tried to frame it. It is easy for them to frame it in such a manner because there is no way they will admit to the unpopular socialist/liberal/progressive (or whatever fits) policies that were forced on them during the Obama Administration.

p.s. You are correct in that I never watch Fox media.


2) You said, " I think most (not all) have no intention to break the law, ...". That is like an alcoholic (or anyone) saying they have no intention to break the law when they get into a car and start driving under the influence. Yet they (the protesters) keep going back and doing it over and over.

3) You said, "winning the majority of the popular vote is not a talking point". Yes it is and several of they leaders of the DNC have stressed for everyone to keep making that point.

4) You said, " I have never read anything that remotely suggests the candidate CAUSED it (anti-Muslim sentiment)". That has been promoted from every liberal/progressive angle available including from Loretta Lynch. If you Google "anti-Muslin sentiment Donald Trump" you will find hundreds of examples. Everyone seems to conveniently forget that the spike in anti-Muslim sentiment followed all of the Muslim terrorist attacks but it becomes easily to blame Donald Trump and Republicans.

6) You said, " He has signaled his intention to institute policies I regard as unconstitutional". Do you really believe that he will do anything that is "unconstitutional"? That is not going to happen. Of course there are liberal/progressives that might think anything he does is "unconstitutional".

Don Dix

Rumpelstilzchen -- Your perception of my political standing is quite flawed and presumptuous-- no affiliation to any political party (or movement).

To your comments -- The title of the article, "Voters tell establishment politics to take a hike". I simply pointed out my reasons of the why that happened. And you took that as an opportunity to attack a perceived 'conservative'.

I actually 'hate' no one (except maybe the 'dentist office'), but Hillary was beyond the threshold of 'trust', and it all came to fruition as election day arrived.

To think that having the Clintons back in the White House would be a good thing didn't resonate with the disappearing middle class.

And the 'carry-on' of present policies? -- just where did all those 'operators' originate, 'dry ground'? Oh sure!

Everything that isn't completely left isn't evil, except in the minds of those who have no right. I'm ambidextrous, so you have 'jumped the wrong shark'!


Rumpelstilzchen and treefarmer, you must despise Robert Byrd He was the longest-serving U.S. Senator at the time of his death. And yes, he was a Democrat. Are you being a little hypocritical in your suggestions about Trump nominees?

In the early 1940s, Byrd recruited 150 of his friends and associates to create a new chapter of the Ku Klux Klan in Sophia, West Virginia.[12][13]

According to Byrd, a Klan official told him, "You have a talent for leadership, Bob ... The country needs young men like you in the leadership of the nation." Byrd later recalled, "Suddenly lights flashed in my mind! Someone important had recognized my abilities! Byrd became a recruiter and leader of his chapter. When it came time to elect the top officer (Exalted Cyclops) in the local Klan unit, Byrd won unanimously.

In December 1944, Byrd wrote to segregationist Mississippi Senator Theodore G. Bilbo:

I shall never fight in the armed forces with a negro by my side ... Rather I should die a thousand times, and see Old Glory trampled in the dirt never to rise again, than to see this beloved land of ours become degraded by race mongrels, a throwback to the blackest specimen from the wilds.

— Robert C. Byrd, in a letter to Sen. Theodore Bilbo (D-MS), 1944
In 1946, Byrd wrote a letter to a Grand Wizard stating, "The Klan is needed today as never before, and I am anxious to see its rebirth here in West Virginia and in every state in the nation."