(08-22-2018, 03:35 AM)Galen Wrote:(08-21-2018, 10:13 PM)Kinser79 Wrote: The Dims have been out to lunch for quite some time now. I've not considered them to be a serious party in ages, and their establishment is even more out to lunch than the laity.
Do the Dims have more than sheer outrage at Trump to offer? So far, after the last two years the answer seems to be no. In the end people will look at their wallet and decide if they are better off. Judging from how certain demographics are reacting it may be that many are coming to the conclusion that the Dims do not have anything to offer.
Crackpot source.
If blacks have gaining in economics, it is because of such attributes as better education, dedication on the job (even on 'bad' jobs), greater mobility (commuting from poor sectors of cities to the suburbs where jobs are), and starting businesses. Such has nothing to do with politics.
Donald Trump reminds most blacks of the licit capitalist that they least admire -- the landlord, as that is what he is. The perception about most landlords is that the landlord takes the rent money but creates few jobs and does not innovate. (OK, they are paying off lenders and taxing authorities, which may make them heavy creditors too). Blacks are more likely to be tenants than home-owners... and debtors instead of creditors. Both tendencies usually cause people to go to the left side of the political spectrum, as may explain the urban-rural split in the vote. People in the worst parts of Kentucky are more likely to own their dreadful hovels than are people in Silicon Valley who might pay 3K a month for a studio apartment and pay $500 a month to rent parking space.
...Outrage? Americans have consistently shown disdain for corruption. Despotic tendencies in pols? They have rarely seen such, so we are in uncharted waters on this.
Quote:It is clear that we are in a fourth turning and it seems that the usual rules are breaking down which is to be expected in a Fourth Turning. It would not be surprising if Trump is recognized as a necessary disruption to the status quo in the future.
I concur that by having no connection to politics in any way before becoming President, except for seeking zoning variances and tax abatement, or maybe shooting off his mouth (as might some drunk in a bar), Donald Trump breaks the pattern of American history by getting into office on sheer demagoguery and his alleged acumen as a businessman. The idea has frequently been pushed around that a business owner or executive with a focus on profit-and-loss would bring more efficiency to government. It has not worked well. Many aspects of government have no connection to objectives of profit and loss -- diplomacy, the military, law, and corrections. Furthermore, the businessman often sees his industry as a model for society, which can be irrelevant to the rest of society. An automobile executive would likely know little about agriculture or mining.
I see Donald Trump serving one purpose in politics -- doing everything wrong so that Americans can develop a consensus on what is desirable and necessary in political life.
The ideal subject of totalitarian rule is not the convinced Nazi or the dedicated Communist but instead the people for whom the distinction between fact and fiction, true and false, no longer exists -- Hannah Arendt.