Hillary or Trump?

[jamescfm]

.

[Doc]

The US people have just delivered one massive middle finger to D.C.

In the end, the reason he won is that Americans have had enough of the bullshit. Obviously to many, Trump was worth a try.

Yeah, that's it. That's totally a coherent ideology-

Here's the Text of Trump's State of the Union:

"Dear Washington DC. The American People have sent me here to say precisely one thing to you all. "Fuck You". Thank you, that's all they wanted me to do. You all are on your own for the next 4 years. Peace..."

Except- now that Trump's movement, which was SOOOOOOOO against the establishment (note the incredulity in my words, that that was their main reason for supporting Bozo) that they put their leader into the seat which is by definition "The Establishment", now they have to be against him too or they aren't actually really against the establishment. I mean, you can't really be against the Establishment and be for it at the same time, right?

And of course, you gotta remember that there are more than 317 million people in the US, and only 59,300,000 of them voted for Trump.

So at best you should say "Less than a Fifth of the US People, not even the plurality of the voters, just a decent sized minority, just delivered a middle Finger to DC. Only some of them have had enough of the bullshit. The rest either didn't register an opinion, or voted for the people who explicitly have not had enough of the bullshit, who, by the way represent a larger number of people than those who have had enough of the bull shit.

That is the BEST that we can say about the election. Less people voted for Trump than voted for Clinton, so his "Fuck You" platform didn't even get a plurality of the support from the "US people."

Peace.

[Doc]

The best thing is now the Trumpsters own the fucked up state of things. And they aren't going to do any better in the four or less years that Trump is in office than Obama did in his first, or in his second four. And you better believe Trump's opponents aren't going to let him off the hook when he tries to blame Obama, because he didn't give Obama the same courtesy. Trump is a fucking clown, even if he did get the majority of the Electoral college votes. He has as much business running a country as I do performing open heart surgery, and no number of electoral college votes are going to make up that deficit.

My advice to all anti-Trumpsters: never forget the Donald Trump that existed before 2 am 11/09/16. That guy, not this new guy, that guy is the one who is now the President. No rest for the wicked!

[Zanz]

I'll play Devil's Advocate, I guess. I don't support Trump (neither did I support Hillary). I'm a Wisconsin voter, and I came very close to closing my eyes and thinking of England by voting for her, but at the poll I couldn't do it and abstained on the presidential race. So I bear some blame, I guess, but so it goes.

I think it's a cop out to call Trump's supporters idiotic or ideologically incoherent. I think it's been tough for a lot of us (us being the college educated, e.g. the privileged, and about 100% of the media) to make sense of the "Make America Great Again" slogan because it seemed so vague... ("was it ever great?" and "Is it not great now?" being the two instinctual stereotypical moderate and left wing reactions), but I think for a lot of Trump's supporters (largely rural, high school (or less) educated, working class men) it was not vague at all... These are people who exist in a culture (and most importantly an economy) that has treated them as laggards and undesirables for decades.

"Progress" seems to be the broad ideological platform upon which Democrats have hung their hats - this has meant a couple of things in different sectors:
Economically it's meant a dedication to a post-industrial, post-agricultural focus on the service sector. This has meant an increased expectation for higher education and an ever-increasing disdain (whether perceived or actual) for those who linger in agricultural or industrial jobs and communities. Places like Michigan, my own state of Wisconsin, Ohio, all went to Trump I think primarily not because of some innate agreement with his views towards women or minorities but because at the end of the day a lot of people worry that they will not be able to survive if this Democratic "progressive" agenda is allowed to proceed. These are places that for generations have been rooted in manufacturing and extraction industries (coal) and agriculture. All of those industries are industries that continuously catch flak from all sides... From the environmentalists, from mechanization, from outsourcing, and I think it's easy to put blinders on to a lot of Trump's social beliefs if you feel like your livelihood is embattled. I personally think a lot more of this election rode on Hillary's pledge to put coal workers out of jobs than it did on her emails (though the emails didn't help her).

Socially it's meant a dedication to the empowerment of voters who pretty much to the man support Democrats and their agenda. When it comes down to it, I think Trump is a lot closer to the Republican base socially and a lot less extreme than he's been made out to seem... Republican attitudes toward the LGBTQ community, toward immigrants, toward Islam broadly, towards women - Trump is just a continuation of long trends here. I think that Democrats' approach to these people has been pretty dismal - it's always so preachy, and it seems so political - that's the point Trump was making when he called Hillary out for supposedly laughing at a rape victim... The implication is that Democrats don't actually care about Latinos or Muslims or women or what-have-you any more than Republicans do, they just pay lip service to get the votes... And I honestly think a lot of these same minorities see through it too, as evinced by pretty low turnout, relatively speaking. Hillary won less of the Latino vote than Obama did, despite the fact that Trump was supposedly the Latino community's most obvious anti-candidate in memory. At the same time that Democrats are claiming to be super-progressive their political mechanisms are rigging the primary against populist movements in favor of establishment candidates, and their victors (Obama) are making less legitimate change than they promised. It's easy to just accept the Dems as the party of social fairness, but I remember pretty recently seeing an NPR or NYT article about how if Millenials wanted the silly places like Iowa to swing leftward socially they should start moving there, which struck me as pretty distinctly indicative of the overall tone of the Democratic-leaning mindset: those who have "progressed" need to rescue those who have not from themselves. That's elitism, yep, and it comes off as pretty dickish.

Overall, I think this discussion is less interesting broadly speaking than the continued GOP majority in the Senate and House. Trump in the Whitehouse is one thing (I actually think he'll probably be more centrist than the Congress, and likely will disagree with them often, which will be interesting).

[hts]

How? By narrowly electing a billionaire who's bragged about bribing pols to do his bidding? Face it - this was an AIDS vs cancer type of choice. Not a single thing beyond rhetoric and style will change. The establishment won't even have to make any effort to absorb him because he is already part of it. If in doubt, just take a cursory glance at his main surrogates. Giuliani, Gingrich, Christie... you cannot be more establishment than that.

I agree that he isn't an anti-establishment savior, but the establishment made an obvious and blatant attempt to prevent him from winning throughout the election. Him being in Washington will absolutely shake things up, because IMO he has/will butt heads with establishment leaders from both sides and I believe he will challenge the system.

Him being a really flawed candidate is what makes this such a huge middle finger. The people are willing to elect such a flawed candidate because they are that desperate for change.

I disagree, I think the reason Trump won is that a significant portion of the American population are fucking idiots. Call me elitist but it's true. The guy is a bafoon, if he follows through on his taxation and spending plan, the US will end up in a debt spiral with even more income and wealth inequality. What exactly are the positive effects of a Trump Presidency? The most accurate thing he's ever said is this.

I fail to see how this is anything but catastrophic for American society.

It is absurd to argue that idiocy is the driving reason behind his victory and, to be honest, people acting like you are right now are another reason he won. Just because someone disagrees with you doesn't make them an idiot, and being so dogmatically leftist is very off-putting.

I have seen the reaction on social media and it is laughable. People are literally bitching and whining like babies. Sometimes you lose, sometimes people do not agree with you, sometimes you are even wrong. I think this is something people on both sides should learn, but at the moment it is the left that is making itself look like a nursery of crybabies.

[jamescfm]

.

[hts]

I mean, I kind of anticipated this reaction. The response that 'the people have spoken and you're just butt hurt' but I stand by my point. If you voted for Trump, which I suppose you probably did, why? What about his platform is good for your country?

I am only 17 so I cant vote, but yea I probably would have voted for him. I align with his views on trade and foreign policy, despite how vague they may be. I also dislike Hillary a lot, which is really what pushed me to him.

I am not a huge 'trumpster", but I definitely empathize with his supporters. I understand why many have turned to Trump, and I don't blame them for it.

It defies logic that the working class overwhelmingly voted for the wealthy, big business candidate and against the one who supported improving worker's rights and regulating Wall Street. That's why I say they are idiots.

Hilary is not really a champion of the working class, and is more of a pro-wall street candidate than Trump. Hillary is very intertwined in relationships with Wall street billionaires, and the vast majority of hedge fund managers support her over Trump. Trump's intention to remove the carried interest provision, amongst other things, is an anti wall street policy.

Trump may be wealthy, but he has really connected with working class americans.

[Aquinas]

One little detail we haven't mentioned yet: Hillary Clinton narrowly won the popular vote, with 59,814,018 votes compared to Donald Trump's 59,611,678 votes. Yet Trump still won, due to America's unusual electoral college system.

[Zanz]

One little detail we haven't mentioned yet: Hillary Clinton narrowly won the popular vote, with 59,814,018 votes compared to Donald Trump's 59,611,678 votes. Yet Trump still won, due to America's unusual electoral college system.

That's not all that unusual, it's happened six (I think) times, most recently in 2000.

[Doc]

Warning, this is long. I think it makes some good points, but it is long nonetheless.

I'll play Devil's Advocate, I guess. I don't support Trump (neither did I support Hillary). I'm a Wisconsin voter, and I came very close to closing my eyes and thinking of England by voting for her, but at the poll I couldn't do it and abstained on the presidential race. So I bear some blame, I guess, but so it goes.

[... snip]

Overall, I think this discussion is less interesting broadly speaking than the continued GOP majority in the Senate and House. Trump in the Whitehouse is one thing (I actually think he'll probably be more centrist than the Congress, and likely will disagree with them often, which will be interesting).

Agreed on your last point.

But I will say one thing: I have read more than a dozen different articles, written by liberals (not saying you- your "devil's advocate post just made me think of those others), begging other liberals to please try to just understand the very real and legitimate frustration of the Trump voters. Like, if only leftists could just see it from their side of things, then maybe leftists would have a little bit of empathy for them, and maybe we could maybe realize that they aren't all this or that or whatever, but also maybe we could see their plight as legitimate and so forth.

Yeah. We've all read this, where we read about how these folks are so kicked down and how their life is so incredibly hard, and the are all just barely scraping by in an economy that has left them behind and in a society in which they feel alien and forgotten...

Why don't I ever see articles from the Right telling rightists: "You know, maybe the black folks and the immigrants and the women actually are legitimately scared when you say that you support a candidate who wants to deport 11 million people, and who talks openly about sexually assaulting women and then just flippantly dismiss it as locker talk. And maybe, just maybe they are actually afraid of you because you have a history of supporting the KKK and/or the Minutemen and/or the Oath Keepers, and/or fifty other domestic terrorist organization which could actually do them or people in their community some real, bodily harm if not held in check by the law. And you have a history even recently demonstrated of treating women as either whores, little children or scum, and would be perfectly content to live in a society where that is acceptable behavior in public. Maybe their fear is actually legitimate because many women actually DO experience sexual violence in their lifetimes. Please try to see if from their side."

Why doesn't any rightist author write one of these "Please try to see it from their perspective" articles which have been plaguing leftist literature and NPR and NYT and Medium and so forth as of late? I NEVER see someone at National Review or Fox News or Rush Limbaugh or Breitbart going "You know- maybe, like we don't agree with them or anything, but maybe they actually do have real reasons to fear what would happen to them, as minorities, if you rednecks started running everything." (See- being called a redneck is a badge of honor among these folks, unless it is a leftist elite... and only then does it become a put down.)

Why don't I ever see an article saying "Well, we understand that the only economic activity you have going on in your area is coal, but we Rightists have to come to grips with the fact that we are polluting the shit out of our environment by burning it. We don't have to agree on climate change, but for crying out loud, maybe those liberals have a point when they talk about clean air and mines which systematically pollute the water that we and our kids drink. Yeah, it isn't us Appalachia folks who get to make the decisions about mine clean ups that these corporate bastards refuse to do- we are just the ones who get fucked by those corporations which sold your grandpa, your pa and you food and water at the company store allowing you to buy your way into virtual debt slavery, gave three generations of your family black lung, and then just left you hanging out to dry while they closed the mines so they could protect their share price. Maybe we should get on board the modernization train and figure out how to do something else in our community, something good FOR our community, and not stick to this backward economy anymore." I never see ANY rightists begging their readers to please understand that while it might be the only source of income for so many people, that is nonetheless destroying the air and water not only for everyone else, but for themselves as well.

Why don't we see that?

Well, the answer is because the Right has played this victim bullshit ever since Southern Redemption. It's been elites buying off the people with this bullshit storyline the entire time- "Don't blame us for your shitty state, and hell, don't blame yourself- No you're a proud southerner, even if you are the grittiest dirt farmer in Red Clay County. It's these other folks, the Northerners, the Blacks, the Women, the Mexicans, the Queers who are fucking your lives all up. THEY are the ones to blame for your problems. THOSE NORTHERN CARPETBAGGERS coming down here to take everything your family worked for. It's always someone else, its' never you. You can never be at fault for the shit you are going through. THEY are the ones to blame for your low wages, and NOT the bosses who would prefer to pay first blacks less than whites, and then women less than men and then Mexicans less than hard working Americans. No- it is those groups themselves who are responsible. Hate them, don't look at us. And Hate the government in Washington for being so willing to force you to accept Gays into your communities. Its all their fault, it's never yours, and for crying out loud, its definitely never a person named Nixon, Gingrich Trump.

"And since you aren't responsible for any of this shit, you never have to worry about taking any kind of responsibility to fix any of it. Just let us keep handling things. Keep voting for us, and we'll make sure that you, Southern, and now Western, and now Midwestern rural whites can still at least look down on the blacks. We'll go off to Washington and we'll make sure they understand that the Little people have had enough! But we can't do that unless you elect us, over and over again and follow us because only we know how to fix all the problems you have ever had."

It's a divide and conquer scheme. If poor and working whites in this country ever realized that they have way more in common with poor and working blacks and latinos than they have with the Donald Trumps and the Newt Gingrichs, and the Strom Thurmonds, and the George Wallaces, and the Mike Huckabees, and the Ben Carsons, and the Marco Rubios, and yes, the Hillary Clintons and the Bernie Sanders' of this country, NOTHING could stop them from getting what they wanted, from doing something for themselves which would be irresistible. From fixing the economy in a way which would be beneficial to them, and not to rich assholes in suits, whether in the board room or on Wall Street. From cleaning up their environment in a way which is responsible. From building the kind of society which would allow them to work hard and get ahead, just like they want to.

And, also, by the way, from putting an end to the racial division in this country which still quite legitimately scares the fuck out of like 35 percent of the population at any one time. If they insist they aren't racist, fine. Let's let them prove it- let's see them kick out the white nationalists from their meetings instead of beating up the black protestor. Let's see them start attacking David Duke, instead of turning a conviently blind eye to his endorsements. I am not talking about the politicians who have to disavow it. I mean the people at the rallies themselves.

But these fucking hayseeds, and these supposedly "put down and forgotten" (who, as a group are doing better economically than the median American, by the way) go with the rightwing demagogues instead each and every time. The Right tells me their use of the Confederate flag isn't about racial supremacy, but about "rebel spirit" (and almost under their breath, the other stuff too, right? wink wink nudge nudge.) It is true that the left has their own problems, and their own demagogues too, but I have never seen a group of people so willingly played, for so fucking long, as the group of people who eventually became TEA and then Trump supporters. They have GOTTA know that they are getting taken for a ride, and yet, they are told, and apparently believe that their problems aren't the result of their willing participation in this mass deception run by race baiters, Bible Thumpers and corporate capitalists, but blacks, women, Latinos, "elites" "the media" whatever, anyone but their own damn selves, and certainly not the entrepreneurs who use them for votes.

How in hell does anyone expect me to respect that, and treat those choices that these people make as legitimate?