Thread Rating:
  • 0 Vote(s) - 0 Average
  • 1
  • 2
  • 3
  • 4
  • 5
Trump Trainwreck - Ongoing diary of betrayal and evil
#61
We could use the Reagan commercial about a bear in the woods. Only this time, the bear is Reagan's own party and his own man. And he even looks a bit like one.



"I close my eyes, and I can see a better day" -- Justin Bieber

Keep the spirit alive;
Eric M
Reply
#62
(11-18-2016, 01:23 PM)Eric the Green Wrote:
(11-18-2016, 05:34 AM)Bob Butler 54 Wrote:
(11-17-2016, 05:55 PM)Eric the Green Wrote: There is a terrible orange menace coming over the horizon, a threat to all our livelihoods and fortunes. A threat to our health, well-being and sanity. Trumpzilla is his name. Trumpzilla is coming; prepare and fight!

[Image: trump-zilla.jpg]

Obama Wrote:In an age of social media where so many people are getting their information in sound bites and snippets off their phones, if we can't discriminate between serious arguments and propaganda, then we have problems," he said. "If people, whether they're conservative, liberal, left or right, are unwilling to compromise and engage in the democratic process and are taking absolutist views and demonizing opponents, then democracy will break down.

I wonder if this is what Obama meant by 'demonizing'?

Maybe it's just pointing out what Trump IS.

His war on the environment alone makes him a monster. Do you want him to wipe out all the bees? Atty. Gen Sessions, you really think that's not demonic?

Are you aware, that "Trumpzilla" is the name that Trump supporters chose for him?

Maybe the problem is the interaction and stalemate between the two parties rather than just one party.  We have a dysfunctional government.  A good sized part of the problem is less interest in the good of the people and good government, more interest in confrontation and making the other guys look bad.  Right now, I anticipate an ugly two years followed by an ugly set of mid term elections for the Republicans.  Yes, it is bad that they are getting their innings, but while the culture is centering on extreme partisan thinking, I'm doubtful that we are going to break the pattern of a few terms of Democratic White Houses without filibuster resistant congresses followed by Republicans all over the place and disaster.

The regeneracy would require a consensus, and a consensus isn't coming without a willingness to respect and listen.  Feeding the hate won't get it done.
Reply
#63
(11-19-2016, 02:31 AM)Bob Butler 54 Wrote: Maybe the problem is the interaction and stalemate between the two parties rather than just one party.  We have a dysfunctional government.  A good sized part of the problem is less interest in the good of the people and good government, more interest in confrontation and making the other guys look bad.  Right now, I anticipate an ugly two years followed by an ugly set of mid term elections for the Republicans.  Yes, it is bad that they are getting their innings, but while the culture is centering on extreme partisan thinking, I'm doubtful that we are going to break the pattern of a few terms of Democratic White Houses without filibuster resistant congresses followed by Republicans all over the place and disaster.
You can anticipate a bad midterm 2018 election for Republicans in the House, but given the gerrymander and Trump's appeal to the heartland people, it may not go that far. You can't anticipate a bad election for the GOP in the Senate; there are virtually no Republicans in blue states to vote out, and 10 Democrats from red states are vulnerable. I already pointed this out before. If you're willing to listen, then please don't ignore irrefutable facts when they are pointed out to you. Show me by example.

The problem is the fact that an outdated party is able to enthrall and enslave half the country, and cause a stalemate with their stubborn, fanatical, fundamentalist attitudes. You're not going to get any progress by giving into them and compromising with them. Obama tried that and failed, and he should have known better, and so should we all. This is the Union vs. Dixie; there's no compromise possible. Calling this hate is utterly beside the point. This is reality and where we are.

Quote:The regeneracy would require a consensus, and a consensus isn't coming without a willingness to respect and listen.  Feeding the hate won't get it done.

The only way a regeneracy can happen now, the ONLY way, is for resistance to begin now and build and grow. How that happens is not just for me to describe or prescribe. If people feel they can communicate and convince people on the other side, fine and dandy; go for it. I wish you well. I might try it too. But if you read the article I posted on the other thread about the people of the midwest and the heartland, it's clear that many of them do not have a willingness or ability to listen. In fact, opinions are pretty well settled on both sides. Consensus will only come from victory. That's how it always comes in 4Ts. If you know Strauss and Howe, then you can't ignore that pattern in history.

Right now, the wrong side has won. Things are not looking good. You can't ask people very easily to be happy about it.
"I close my eyes, and I can see a better day" -- Justin Bieber

Keep the spirit alive;
Eric M
Reply
#64
We've had a surplus of posts from the blue perspective.  Perhaps a few words from the forces of evil are appropriate.  From CNN, Steve Bannon of Briebart and the Trump Administration speaks up, saying Darkness is Good.  Note, the opinions stated in the article are those of Steve Bannon, and do not reflect the opinions of this poster.

Steve Bannon Wrote:Dick Cheney. Darth Vader. Satan. That's power. It only helps us when they (liberals) get it wrong. When they're blind to who we are and what we're doing.

CNN Wrote:Briebart News, which Bannon has been associated with since its start in 2007, has been vehemently pro-Trump throughout his presidential campaign, and is also known for pushing nationalist policy positions, as well as conspiracy theories, and has been criticized as being racist, sexist and anti-Semitic.

CNN Wrote:"He gets it; he gets it intuitively," Bannon said about Trump. "You have probably the greatest orator since William Jennings Bryan, coupled with an economic populist message and two political parties that are so owned by the donors that they don't speak to their audience."

He said he always knew that former Democratic nominee Hillary Clinton would lose the election.

"I knew that she couldn't close," he said. "They outspent us 10 to one, had 10 times more people and had all the media with them, but I kept saying it doesn't matter, they got it all wrong, we've got this locked."

Now, I'm no fan of this guy nor his way of looking at things, but he makes a few points here.  If the Democrats don't do a lot more listening, if they aren't aware of or care about what much of America is thinking, they'll continue to have problems.
Reply
#65
(11-19-2016, 02:31 AM)Bob Butler 54 Wrote:
(11-18-2016, 01:23 PM)Eric the Green Wrote:
(11-18-2016, 05:34 AM)Bob Butler 54 Wrote:
(11-17-2016, 05:55 PM)Eric the Green Wrote: There is a terrible orange menace coming over the horizon, a threat to all our livelihoods and fortunes. A threat to our health, well-being and sanity. Trumpzilla is his name. Trumpzilla is coming; prepare and fight!

[Image: trump-zilla.jpg]

Obama Wrote:In an age of social media where so many people are getting their information in sound bites and snippets off their phones, if we can't discriminate between serious arguments and propaganda, then we have problems," he said. "If people, whether they're conservative, liberal, left or right, are unwilling to compromise and engage in the democratic process and are taking absolutist views and demonizing opponents, then democracy will break down.

I wonder if this is what Obama meant by 'demonizing'?

Maybe it's just pointing out what Trump IS.

His war on the environment alone makes him a monster. Do you want him to wipe out all the bees? Atty. Gen Sessions, you really think that's not demonic?

Are you aware, that "Trumpzilla" is the name that Trump supporters chose for him?

Maybe the problem is the interaction and stalemate between the two parties rather than just one party.  We have a dysfunctional government.  A good sized part of the problem is less interest in the good of the people and good government, more interest in confrontation and making the other guys look bad.  Right now, I anticipate an ugly two years followed by an ugly set of mid term elections for the Republicans.  Yes, it is bad that they are getting their innings, but while the culture is centering on extreme partisan thinking, I'm doubtful that we are going to break the pattern of a few terms of Democratic White Houses without filibuster resistant congresses followed by Republicans all over the place and disaster.

The regeneracy would require a consensus, and a consensus isn't coming without a willingness to respect and listen.  Feeding the hate won't get it done.

Nice to see this comment. I hope for it to spread before bloodshed occurs.
1984 Apollonian Civic
ISFP - The Artist.






Reply
#66
(11-19-2016, 08:40 AM)Bob Butler 54 Wrote: We've had a surplus of posts from the blue perspective.  Perhaps a few words from the forces of evil are appropriate.  From CNN, Steve Bannon of Briebart and the Trump Administration speaks up, saying Darkness is Good.  Note, the opinions stated in the article are those of Steve Bannon, and do not reflect the opinions of this poster.

Steve Bannon Wrote:Dick Cheney. Darth Vader. Satan. That's power. It only helps us when they (liberals) get it wrong. When they're blind to who we are and what we're doing.

CNN Wrote:Briebart News, which Bannon has been associated with since its start in 2007, has been vehemently pro-Trump throughout his presidential campaign, and is also known for pushing nationalist policy positions, as well as conspiracy theories, and has been criticized as being racist, sexist and anti-Semitic.

CNN Wrote:"He gets it; he gets it intuitively," Bannon said about Trump. "You have probably the greatest orator since William Jennings Bryan, coupled with an economic populist message and two political parties that are so owned by the donors that they don't speak to their audience."

He said he always knew that former Democratic nominee Hillary Clinton would lose the election.

"I knew that she couldn't close," he said. "They outspent us 10 to one, had 10 times more people and had all the media with them, but I kept saying it doesn't matter, they got it all wrong, we've got this locked."

Now, I'm no fan of this guy nor his way of looking at things, but he makes a few points here.  If the Democrats don't do a lot more listening, if they aren't aware of or care about what much of America is thinking, they'll continue to have problems.
Well said.
1984 Apollonian Civic
ISFP - The Artist.






Reply
#67
(11-19-2016, 08:40 AM)Bob Butler 54 Wrote: We've had a surplus of posts from the blue perspective.  Perhaps a few words from the forces of evil are appropriate.  From CNN, Steve Bannon of Briebart and the Trump Administration speaks up, saying Darkness is Good.  Note, the opinions stated in the article are those of Steve Bannon, and do not reflect the opinions of this poster.

Steve Bannon Wrote:Dick Cheney. Darth Vader. Satan. That's power. It only helps us when they (liberals) get it wrong. When they're blind to who we are and what we're doing.

CNN Wrote:Briebart News, which Bannon has been associated with since its start in 2007, has been vehemently pro-Trump throughout his presidential campaign, and is also known for pushing nationalist policy positions, as well as conspiracy theories, and has been criticized as being racist, sexist and anti-Semitic.

CNN Wrote:"He gets it; he gets it intuitively," Bannon said about Trump. "You have probably the greatest orator since William Jennings Bryan, coupled with an economic populist message and two political parties that are so owned by the donors that they don't speak to their audience."

He said he always knew that former Democratic nominee Hillary Clinton would lose the election.

"I knew that she couldn't close," he said. "They outspent us 10 to one, had 10 times more people and had all the media with them, but I kept saying it doesn't matter, they got it all wrong, we've got this locked."

Now, I'm no fan of this guy nor his way of looking at things, but he makes a few points here.  If the Democrats don't do a lot more listening, if they aren't aware of or care about what much of America is thinking, they'll continue to have problems.

It's a good point, but I think the main thing Democratic candidates need to do, besides listening (which Hillary is good at), is speaking well (like the "greatest orator since William Jennings Bryan" did); or persuading welll. 

Much of Americans' thinking today is foolish, and works against their own interests. That's just the way it is; it will do us no good to ignore that fact. They need to be persuaded, as far as possible, to do what's in their real interests. And they need to ignore those who say "that's talking down to them." Everyone ought to be able to understand that trickle-down economics is a failure. Everyone. There is no excuse for anyone, anywhere not to know that. And to say that it's a failure, and understand that people need to be persuaded that it's a failure, is not to hold oneself above anyone. It's all elementary.

So, they've now been persuaded by Trump that the part of trickle-down economics/laissez faire entitled "free trade" is a failure. Good. Hey, that's a start!
"I close my eyes, and I can see a better day" -- Justin Bieber

Keep the spirit alive;
Eric M
Reply
#68
(11-19-2016, 03:56 PM)Eric the Green Wrote: It's a good point, but I think the main thing Democratic candidates need to do, besides listening (which Hillary is good at), is speaking well (like the "greatest orator since William Jennings Bryan" did); or persuading welll. 

I'm not all that impressed by Trump as a speaker.  Perhaps if you're already convinced in what he's saying, but to me he depends altogether too much on repeated lies being accepted by an unquestioning audience.

No doubt Hillary's lesser public speaking ability hurt her.  I was hoping that surrogates like Michelle, Obama and her husband could cover it, but no...  The Democrats need a charismatic voice to lead their message.

(11-19-2016, 03:56 PM)Eric the Green Wrote: Much of Americans' thinking today is foolish, and works against their own interests. That's just the way it is; it will do us no good to ignore that fact. They need to be persuaded, as far as possible, to do what's in their real interests. And they need to ignore those who say "that's talking down to them." Everyone ought to be able to understand that trickle-down economics is a failure. Everyone. There is no excuse for anyone, anywhere not to know that. And to say that it's a failure, and understand that people need to be persuaded that it's a failure, is not to hold oneself above anyone. It's all elementary.

So, they've now been persuaded by Trump that the part of trickle-down economics/laissez faire entitled "free trade" is a failure. Good. Hey, that's a start!

A lot of truth in the above.  There might be a limited number of points to be made.  Making them might well require respecting the audience, not talking down, hammering down persistent lies, and finding a good speaker or three.

Major points to be pounded?

Trump isn't going to drain the swamp.  He's a swamp monster.  This is becoming clear by the number of lobbyists he is bringing into the White House.  A persistent, truthful and verifiable reporting of how the Republicans favor special interests ought to be maintained.  Every bill they push through congress, every executive action favoring the robber barons, ought to be clearly and truthfully reported.

Borrow and spend trickle down has always failed.  I don't know if you caught the simplistic economic model I proposed to Kinser, but the bottom line is that there is too much transfer of capitol from Main Street to Easy Street through both tax policy and dividends.  The counter argument I've most often seen blames FDR for Hoover's crash and blames Obama for Bush 43's.  When the Republicans mess up big time, it takes more than four years of Democratic rule to fully recover.  We've seen that pattern through the unravellings.  The Republicans blow things up, the Democrats get things more or less going again while still hobbled by a lack of control of Congress, then the People get impatient by the slow pace of the recovery.  They give control back to the Republicans, and cause another disaster.  That pattern has to be made clear and broken.

The race, gender and cultural divisions are problems too.  I'm not sure how to address this in a respectful way without talking down and while showing respect for the opposing point of view.  I don't see all Republicans as deplorable, though there are enough deplorables to really really matter.  The southern strategy has long been a quiet part of their base strategy, but now Trump seems to be bringing it out in the open.  How does one appeal to any true 'family values' folk to reject the uglier strain of Trump's schtick?  I have trouble treating racists with respect, without scorn, without talking down.  While in a lot of ways I think your strident insulting approach isn't productive, in this area it is all too easy for me to join you.

On campaign finance, Trump made much about Hillary's giving talks to Wall Street audiences and taking lots of money from super pacs.  I'd like to see the Democrats widely adapt Bernie's approach to financing campaigns.  It is not sufficient just to promote the interests of the People over the robber barons, one has to avoid the appearance of being beholden to the robber barons.  While I see the Clinton Foundation as doing good work while Trump's use of his foundation was criminal, even the appearance of corruption when manipulated by expert liars can hurt.  In these days of fake news and submerging truth with repeated lies, charities such as the Clinton Foundation ought to be run by retired politicians rather than active ones.

I'm sure there are other issues and areas requiring similar treatment.  I guess my concern is still saying these things with enough respect and fact, with as little talking down as possible.  Values lock is still there.  No one wants to change what they believe.  Thus, the temptation to increase the volume and emotional intensity is tremendous.  Still, it is easily possible by overdoing the brazen attitude and emotional volume to cause them to tune out.

I can completely understand where the authors of all these anti Trump videos are coming from.  Still, remember the thought a lot of Democrats were feeling about the 'mistake' in Trump's end game?  He was focusing on his base and not reaching out to the wider audience he needed to win?  With hindsight, who was it that made that mistake?
Reply
#69
(11-19-2016, 05:04 PM)Bob Butler 54 Wrote: I'm not all that impressed by Trump as a speaker.  Perhaps if you're already convinced in what he's saying, but to me he depends altogether too much on repeated lies being accepted by an unquestioning audience.

No doubt Hillary's lesser public speaking ability hurt her.  I was hoping that surrogates like Michelle, Obama and her husband could cover it, but no...  The Democrats need a charismatic voice to lead their message.
No question. No question Trump is entertaining and dramatic. No question he lies, etc. And can his unquestioning audience be excused for ignoring or applauding his prejudice?

I heard a few ads this year from the two candidates, which was unusual in CA. I had to admit, Trump's were better. They spoke to real needs and his supposed answers. Hillary's ads just ran down the other guy.

Quote:A lot of truth in the above.  There might be a limited number of points to be made.  Making them might well require respecting the audience, not talking down, hammering down persistent lies, and finding a good speaker or three.

Major points to be pounded?

Trump isn't going to drain the swamp.  He's a swamp monster.  This is becoming clear by the number of lobbyists he is bringing into the White House.  A persistent, truthful and verifiable reporting of how the Republicans favor special interests ought to be maintained.  Every bill they push through congress, every executive action favoring the robber barons, ought to be clearly and truthfully reported.

Borrow and spend trickle down has always failed.  I don't know if you caught the simplistic economic model I proposed to Kinser, but the bottom line is that there is too much transfer of capitol from Main Street to Easy Street through both tax policy and dividends.  The counter argument I've most often seen blames FDR for Hoover's crash and blames Obama for Bush 43's.  When the Republicans mess up big time, it takes more than four years of Democratic rule to fully recover.  We've seen that pattern through the unravellings.  The Republicans blow things up, the Democrats get things more or less going again while still hobbled by a lack of control of Congress, then the People get impatient by the slow pace of the recovery.  They give control back to the Republicans, and cause another disaster.  That pattern has to be made clear and broken.

The race, gender and cultural divisions are problems too.  I'm not sure how to address this in a respectful way without talking down and while showing respect for the opposing point of view.  I don't see all Republicans as deplorable, though there are enough deplorables to really really matter.  The southern strategy has long been a quiet part of their base strategy, but now Trump seems to be bringing it out in the open.  How does one appeal to any true 'family values' folk to reject the uglier strain of Trump's schtick?  I have trouble treating racists with respect, without scorn, without talking down.  While in a lot of ways I think your strident insulting approach isn't productive, in this area it is all too easy for me to join you.

On campaign finance, Trump made much about Hillary's giving talks to Wall Street audiences and taking lots of money from super pacs.  I'd like to see the Democrats widely adapt Bernie's approach to financing campaigns.  It is not sufficient just to promote the interests of the People over the robber barons, one has to avoid the appearance of being beholden to the robber barons.  While I see the Clinton Foundation as doing good work while Trump's use of his foundation was criminal, even the appearance of corruption when manipulated by expert liars can hurt.  In these days of fake news and submerging truth with repeated lies, charities such as the Clinton Foundation ought to be run by retired politicians rather than active ones.

I'm sure there are other issues and areas requiring similar treatment.  I guess my concern is still saying these things with enough respect and fact, with as little talking down as possible.  Values lock is still there.  No one wants to change what they believe.  Thus, the temptation to increase the volume and emotional intensity is tremendous.  Still, it is easily possible by overdoing the brazen attitude and emotional volume to cause them to tune out.

I can completely understand where the authors of all these anti Trump videos are coming from.  Still, remember the thought a lot of Democrats were feeling about the 'mistake' in Trump's end game?  He was focusing on his base and not reaching out to the wider audience he needed to win?  With hindsight, who was it that made that mistake?

The Democrats made it. Trump had a broader base than we thought, too. It says something about where our country is now, and it's not good.

Good statement, Bob. I just think the resistance has to be strong and clear. If some people are insulted, that may be inevitable. But people also can respond well to strong statements and honest conviction. I don't say, as Trump did, that I am that voice. Those of us who care about life and humanity and truth are all going to need to raise our voices, in our own way.
"I close my eyes, and I can see a better day" -- Justin Bieber

Keep the spirit alive;
Eric M
Reply
#70
[Image: 1457670_10153700209038538_40606942122002...e=58C99E38]
"I close my eyes, and I can see a better day" -- Justin Bieber

Keep the spirit alive;
Eric M
Reply
#71
Some early betrayals are indicated:


- Not going to lock her up apparently
- Not going to go after China as a "currency manipulator"
- Not going to renegotiate NAFTA

I'm down with these betrayals because to a greater or lesser degree the promises were evil.

Just imagining some disappointment by the Trumpocrats. I'm sure they'll let these pass as pragmatic but I'm also sure there's an ember of doubt been planted way down in those brains somewhere; its going to be fun to watch it grow.
Reply
#72
(11-22-2016, 04:30 PM)playwrite Wrote: Some early betrayals are indicated:


- Not going to lock her up apparently
- Not going to go after China as a "currency manipulator"
- Not going to renegotiate NAFTA

I'm down with these betrayals because to a greater or lesser degree the promises were evil.

Just imagining some disappointment by the Trumpocrats.  I'm sure they'll let these pass as pragmatic but I'm also sure there's an ember of doubt been planted way down in those brains somewhere; its going to be fun to watch it grow.

Now he's disavowing the alt right.

CNN Wrote:President-elect Donald Trump denied Tuesday that he did anything to energize the "alt-right" movement through his presidential campaign and sought to distance himself from it, even though many of the movement's leaders have sought to tether their political views to Trump's rise.

"I don't want to energize the group, and I disavow the group," Trump told a group of New York Times reporters and columnists during a meeting at the newspaper's headquarters in New York.

"It's not a group I want to energize, and if they are energized, I want to look into it and find out why," he added, according to one of the Times reporters in the room, Michael Grynbaum.

I expect any number of people are ready to explain why.

I'm beginning to wonder, if he keeps morphing away from his campaign rhetoric and posturing, how long before he's a Democrat again?
Reply
#73
One step closer.  He's reconsidering his position on climate change.

CNN Wrote:On the campaign trail, Trump had pledged to withdraw the United States from the Paris climate accords -- a move that would upend global efforts to address global warming.

Tuesday, he wasn't as specific.

"I'm looking at it very closely. I have an open mind to it," he said.

It was part of a broader change for the President-elect on the topic of climate science. He had previously rejected scientists' conclusion that humans have played a role in the earth's warming. But on Tuesday, Trump said that "I think there is some connectivity" between humans and climate change, although he declined to elaborate.

A big gap between what a politician says he will do and what he actually does isn't surprising.  Anyone want to suggest someone who flipped this much immediately after an election?

Mind you, I'm not complaining about most of the flips.  Mostly, the old Trump spoke to attract the Republican base, while the new Trump might be more in touch with reality.
Reply
#74
Is waterboarding next?

CNN Wrote:President-elect Donald Trump said a conversation with Ret. Marine Corps Gen. James Mattis gave him a new perspective on waterboarding, a torture tool he has pledged to reinstate.

"General Mattis is a strong, highly dignified man. I met with him at length and I asked him that question. I said, 'What do you think of waterboarding?'" the Trump told The New York Times on Tuesday. "He said -- I was surprised -- he said, 'I've never found it to be useful.' He said, 'I've always found, give me a pack of cigarettes and a couple of beers and I do better with that than I do with torture.'"
Reply
#75
(11-23-2016, 04:23 AM)Bob Butler 54 Wrote: One step closer.  He's reconsidering his position on climate change.

CNN Wrote:On the campaign trail, Trump had pledged to withdraw the United States from the Paris climate accords -- a move that would upend global efforts to address global warming.

Tuesday, he wasn't as specific.

"I'm looking at it very closely. I have an open mind to it," he said.

It was part of a broader change for the President-elect on the topic of climate science. He had previously rejected scientists' conclusion that humans have played a role in the earth's warming. But on Tuesday, Trump said that "I think there is some connectivity" between humans and climate change, although he declined to elaborate.

A big gap between what a politician says he will do and what he actually does isn't surprising.  Anyone want to suggest someone who flipped this much immediately after an election?

Mind you, I'm not complaining about most of the flips.  Mostly, the old Trump spoke to attract the Republican base, while the new Trump might be more in touch with reality.

Trump has never been consistent in what he says. Recall the videos in which Trump earlier all but endorsed Hillary Clinton and the Democrats.

However, his appointment designations have so far been abominable. What he does will be the test of whether he is some kind of moderate or some kind of right-winger. I suspect that he may do well at reassuring people, and then turn around and do horrible things. But I hope and pray that I am wrong.

I have written before, that-- empirically according to the aspects in his chart-- he may actually do a pretty good job. But that is based on (a) my choice of which presidents are "the best" and (b) a rather small sample of those.
"I close my eyes, and I can see a better day" -- Justin Bieber

Keep the spirit alive;
Eric M
Reply
#76
I'm now taking best on whether or not the voters will do it to themselves again in 2018 and 2020.

Struggling White Voters Who Helped Elect Trump Are Headed for Some Serious Pain
A lot of low-income voters believed Trump when he promised to make America great. They’re in for a rude awakening.
By Joshua Holland
https://www.thenation.com/article/strugg...s-remorse/

[Image: trump_supporters_california_rtr_img.jpg?...ompress=80]
Demonstrators hold signs in support of President-elect Donald Trump in Oceanside, California, November 11, 2016. (Reuters / Sandy Huffaker)

Donald Trump ran on a series of impossible promises, but enough people believed he could deliver on them that he won the Electoral College. His supporters are in for what might be the rudest awakening in recent political history.

Immediately after the election, the candidate who ran against the establishment, the guy who promised to “drain the swamp,” immediately surrounded himself with party hacks and lobbyists. He announced that Republican National Committee chair Reince Priebus, perhaps the most prominent face of the dreaded “establishment,” would be his chief of staff. Good-government advocates expect the Trump regime to gut what remains of our already tattered campaign-finance laws. Reuters reports that, “despite his professed opposition to the 2003 U.S. invasion of Iraq, President-elect Donald Trump is considering several of the major advocates of that war for top national security posts.” And as Politico’s Ben White put it, “a populist candidate who railed against shady financial interests on the campaign trail is now putting together an administration that looks like an investment banker’s dream.”

Trump’s not going to make coal cheaper than natural gas and bring back a bunch of mining jobs. He might be able to negotiate some new riders for NAFTA, but they’ll be guided by the same corporate lobbyists who effectively wrote it in the first place, and won’t do anything to bring back jobs that have been sent overseas. There will be no 35 percent tariff on imports from Mexico or China.

It’s the rural poor who are going to be hit especially hard by the coming bait-and-switch.

The exit polls show that Trump beat Clinton among affluent voters, and Americans up and down the economic ladder responded to his dog whistles, or at least voted for their party despite the bigotry displayed by its nominee. But Trump made huge gains over Mitt Romney among those making $30,000 or less, and benefited from a major urban-rural divide. And it’s the rural poor who put him over the top in key swing states who are going to be hit especially hard by the coming bait and switch.

An analysis of the election results by researchers at the University of Washington found that the single greatest predictor for whether a county would swing toward Trump, relative to Mitt Romney’s performance in 2012, was a combination of short life expectancies and poor measures of public health. As a report in The Economist put it, “holding all other factors constant—including the share of non-college whites—the better physical shape a county’s residents are in, the worse Mr. Trump did relative to Mr. Romney.”

Clay County, Kentucky, is a profoundly depressed area in the heart of coal country. Whether its residents responded to Trump’s dog whistles or rolled the dice on a successful businessman to shake up a status quo that had failed them, the results suggest that they saw real hope in his election: Trump won the county 79-21. But according to NPR, a lot of folks in Clay County are now starting to worry about their health care, and with good reason. Kentucky set up an Obamacare exchange and expanded Medicaid under then-governor Steve Beshear, a Democrat, and today around one in three of the state’s residents are covered under the program. Kentucky’s uninsured rate dropped from 20 percent to just 7.5 percent over the course of two short years. In Clay County, where almost four in 10 live in poverty, 60 percent of the population relies on Medicaid, and Matt Bevin, the Republican governor who took over in 2015, wants to roll back the expansion if the federal government doesn’t sign off on his plan to charge beneficiaries higher premiums. Obama’s HHS was expected to reject Bevin’s scheme, but that’s unlikely to happen under Trump.

It is these very voters—less educated, struggling to get by on low incomes—who will bear the brunt of unified Republican government under Trump. The GOP Congress may give Trump his “infrastructure plan,” but that looks like it will consist of a bunch of tax cuts for investors to sink into toll bridges and toll roads. It will definitely give him the rest of his huge tax cuts, but those are skewed toward those at the top and won’t bring much relief to the “forgotten men and women of this country,” as he promised when campaigning. If the GOP repeals the Affordable Care Act, as it’s vowed to do since it was enacted, many of these voters will lose their subsidized health insurance. Block-granting Medicaid and privatizing Medicare will dramatically increase these their economic insecurity. They’ll lose food stamps and Head Start slots. They’ll lose access to reproductive health care. They can forget about a hike in the federal minimum wage. According to one estimate, 20 million Trump voters will lose out on a big raise when Republicans kill Obama’s overtime rule. And if the GOP doesn’t get rid of it entirely, they’ll at least hobble the Consumer Financial Protection Bureau, which reined in the kind of predatory lending schemes that often indenture the working poor. It’ll be death by a thousand cuts.

In a sense, Trump’s supporters are going to face the same realization that many progressives did when Barack Obama didn’t end racism or bring comity to Congress or usher in a new liberal golden age. Americans elect not only a president, but also over 2,000 members of a political coalition to policy-making positions across a sprawling government. Anyone who pins their hopes on an individual savior—like the people of Clay County, Kentucky—is guaranteed to be sorely disappointed. But in Trump’s case, the disappointment will be more profound, both because he promised more and because his party will likely have unified control of government for his entire first term and will own all of the pain he causes.

How struggling voters who pinned their hopes on Trump will ultimately react is a question that will be answered in the coming years. The best-case scenario is that they rethink support, or at least sit out the 2020 election. At worst, they’ll become more reactionary, and more likely to lash out at those they perceive as the other. What’s certain is that they’re headed for an epic case of buyers’ remorse.
"I close my eyes, and I can see a better day" -- Justin Bieber

Keep the spirit alive;
Eric M
Reply
#77
We were talking on the thread about those people in the rural areas, about why they stay put in these depressed areas. As Trump's policies condemn them to even more poverty, they may be forced to move to the cities. That's what happens in most poor countries when crops fail, landowners get greedy or poverty gets worse. In fact, I'm amazed that rural voters are still so numerous that they can swing an election.

But if they move to the cities, there's a chance a few of them become less provincial in their thinking, less wedded to the self-reliance meme, and more aware of the benefits of government services and regulations. It used to be one of the demographic trends in America and worldwide, that people moved to the cities, and cities expanded. Could this trend start back up again, and add to the demographic trend of increasing diversity-- likely to still be a factor given that hispanics don't soon forget insults and attacks on them?

Well, at this point I'm grasping for any kind of hope Smile
"I close my eyes, and I can see a better day" -- Justin Bieber

Keep the spirit alive;
Eric M
Reply
#78
Eric the Green Wrote:We were talking on the thread about those people in the rural areas, about why they stay put in these depressed areas. As Trump's policies condemn them to even more poverty, they may be forced to move to the cities.

You're kidding right?  Just look at this   house price.

Quote:That's what happens in most poor countries when crops fail, landowners get greedy or poverty gets worse. In fact, I'm amazed that rural voters are still so numerous that they can swing an election.

I think folks would be better off doing the exact opposite. The best idea is to sell a house in bubbleland and go to nice cheap Oklahoma and retire on the house price differential. Cool

Quote:But if they move to the cities, there's a chance a few of them become less provincial in their thinking, less wedded to the self-reliance meme, and more aware of the benefits of government services and regulations.

Well, if I moved to Silicone Valley, I'd have to live in :

[Image: 1280px-Shack_in_Pigeon_Forge%2C_TN_by_Za...Davies.jpg]


Quote:It used to be one of the demographic trends in America and worldwide, that people moved to the cities, and cities expanded. Could this trend start back up again, and add to the demographic trend of increasing diversity-- likely to still be a factor given that hispanics don't soon forget insults and attacks on them?

Well, at this point I'm grasping for any kind of hope Smile

Dunno,  C2H5-OH  , the social lubricant.   Big Grin   Paternal granny is from Arkansas.  Perhaps, take up an old family tradition, eh?
---Value Added Cool
Reply
#79
(11-23-2016, 06:12 PM)X_4AD_84 Wrote: Lower cost of living.

Bingo.

Quote:Especially if someone doesn't have the skills and experience to work in tech / finance / media / etc. If a person has a McJob, where would they rather be? Paying out the nose at the coasts or living a bit better inland?

+Tech has an expiry date.  If ya get laid off and don't get a job in say a year, you go to the reject pile. That's when all you can get is ... McJob / McWages.


Quote: Another one is, even if in tech or other high paid career, people who want to recreate what they experienced growing up during the 70s need to move someplace like Placer County or out of state in order to afford the equivalent now. A number of the ones who've not moved away are either unmarried or if married, are child free. Once one does not have to worry about raising a family, options open up regarding where to live.

Well, if one wants to restrict to CA due to Weed legalization, here's an   an awesome choice!

I chose this specimen because of the carefree yard!
---Value Added Cool
Reply
#80
(11-23-2016, 04:53 PM)Eric the Green Wrote: We were talking on the thread about those people in the rural areas, about why they stay put in these depressed areas. As Trump's policies condemn them to even more poverty, they may be forced to move to the cities. That's what happens in most poor countries when crops fail, landowners get greedy or poverty gets worse. In fact, I'm amazed that rural voters are still so numerous that they can swing an election.

But if they move to the cities, there's a chance a few of them become less provincial in their thinking, less wedded to the self-reliance meme, and more aware of the benefits of government services and regulations. It used to be one of the demographic trends in America and worldwide, that people moved to the cities, and cities expanded. Could this trend start back up again, and add to the demographic trend of increasing diversity-- likely to still be a factor given that hispanics don't soon forget insults and attacks on them?

Well, at this point I'm grasping for any kind of hope Smile

(11-23-2016, 06:11 PM)Ragnarök_62 Wrote:
Eric the Green Wrote:We were talking on the thread about those people in the rural areas, about why they stay put in these depressed areas. As Trump's policies condemn them to even more poverty, they may be forced to move to the cities.

You're kidding right?  Just look at this   house price.

Quote:That's what happens in most poor countries when crops fail, landowners get greedy or poverty gets worse. In fact, I'm amazed that rural voters are still so numerous that they can swing an election.

I think folks would be better off doing the exact opposite. The best idea is to sell a house in bubbleland and go to nice cheap Oklahoma and retire on the house price differential. Cool

Quote:But if they move to the cities, there's a chance a few of them become less provincial in their thinking, less wedded to the self-reliance meme, and more aware of the benefits of government services and regulations.

Well, if I moved to Silicone Valley, I'd have to live in :

[Image: 1280px-Shack_in_Pigeon_Forge%2C_TN_by_Za...Davies.jpg]


Quote:It used to be one of the demographic trends in America and worldwide, that people moved to the cities, and cities expanded. Could this trend start back up again, and add to the demographic trend of increasing diversity-- likely to still be a factor given that hispanics don't soon forget insults and attacks on them?

Well, at this point I'm grasping for any kind of hope Smile

Dunno,  C2H5-OH  , the social lubricant.   Big Grin   Paternal granny is from Arkansas.  Perhaps, take up an old family tradition, eh?

The best choice for many Americans will be to sell out overpriced houses in the USA and go elsewhere./ Net migration from the Mexico to the USA is now negative.... figure that many Mexican citizens in California, with its stratospheric housing costs, makes selling a house in California, taking the proceeds, and retiring in Mexico where housing and medical costs are far lower can make sense. One might gain a social notch just by doing so. If I had a Mexican or Mexican-American wife I would do so.

If things get really bad in rural America due to crop failures or farm foreclosures, then huge numbers of poor people making desperate moves to the Big Cities will only accentuate America's civic distress. Some kid who grows up on a farm in rural Ohio, gets a teaching degree in Ohio State and then stays in Greater Columbus will change in culture. After a certain time (30 miles away from a Best Buy/Barnes&Noble/Starbuck's/sushi restaurant? No way!) a return to rural America for any more than a weekend might become unthinkable. But with farm labors and dispossessed farmers going to the big cities in desperate efforts to find such few jobs that might open on occasion for unskilled labor indicates big trouble. That's when people start falling for anything rhetorical as an antithesis to what the people in power have.

I figure that the Trump Administration, both Houses of Congress, and most state legislatures will do everything possible to make liberalism permanently irrelevant to American politics. Such opens America to extremism, both of the extreme Left and Right. Having coarsened the level of political discourse by delving into racist rhetoric outside any part of the Establishment since the 1960s. President Trump has potentially unleashed the whirlwind of genocide if desperately-poor people see race as the menace. On the other side, a combination of extreme poverty, lack of opportunity, economic instability, personal dislocation, a government either unwilling or unable to mitigate mass distress, and the absence of effective democracy while economic elites indulge themselves without restraint makes a Socialist insurrection possible. It may be hard to believe that America could become a sick society fast enough for such to happen, but history can move fast.

Another possibility, one that may be even closer, will be for the United States to splinter into sundry new entities. Some might resemble American states, but some will have strange worm-like shapes that connect big cities that one might not imagine on a current map.  Some will simply be city-states. Most of the territory will be an impressive, still-gigantic state in area, but it will largely be the rural void without giant or even medium-sized cities. In some such places one will need to fly the Confederate flag to show loyalty -- and keeping a portrait of Barack Obama will be cause for summary execution.

This will be an economic disaster. In the chaos of rural areas denying food and energy to urban folks and cities denying port facilities for shipping foodstuffs, people will eventually decide upon some new political order. It will not be what we have now, for it will have failed. A new constitutional arrangement will be necessary to prevent any relapse of  despotism or dictatorship, and people in all parts of what remains of the USA or its successor will need to force radical changes upon the culture.
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.


Reply


Forum Jump:


Users browsing this thread: 1 Guest(s)