‘Trump Is What Happens When a Political Party Abandons Ideas’

Mathloom, I was born and raised in Texas and served 4 years in the Marine Corps amongst some of the most conservative young people in the country while stationed in Jacksonville,North Carolina. I still have dozens of acquaintances from my time in that I keep in touch with through social media or in person. I think I know far more about the right wing movement than you do.

None of these people are seeking after coal or manufacturing jobs. Most of them restrict their news consumption to a few right wing sources and facebook circle jerking. There number one concern is pissing off 'libtards'. Supporting Trump and voting for him is CULTURAL, not economical.

Lol at ignoring my fellow citizen. I've lived in an American right wing bubble for far longer than you ever have.

 

I'm not a big fan of those factional education "studies" either but literally nothing in this sentence is true.

 

And they choose a man whose temperament is one of a petty, man-child. Not sure how that helps your case.

 

Fundamentally, the United State was found on individuality liberalism. Personal liberty and rights are king over everything else. When the nation is more holistic of one race or culture, a dominate race or culture, it's all fine and dandy. When it's no longer that and is getting more diverse - you get what we are getting now. The dominate race/culture losing out is not okay and everything can be rejected to protect that. That's my personal belief and I haven't a clue how long it will last. I suspect maybe just another decade at most.

 

You carried that over about infrastructure. Bro you are way too critical of my posts but I do like attention. Not being a jerk

I realized the infrastructure comment was a contradiction from big government.

Sorry for the confusion

What I was saying about Obama and big government is Trump is winning the rhetoric battle on a personal level.

For instance, people in that thread are arguing in that thread as if saving six hundred jobs affects them when they have nothing to do with those jobs.

Trump won that battle with the six hundred jobs he saved. But those are the piecemeal battles that have to be fought going forward

Trump won by targeting very specific groups

 

Winning and losing is fundamental to getting anything done

 

Be honest. You honestly think that those small little deals were nothing more than political exposure? If Trump's solution is giving corporations more leverage by handing them out tax breaks for merely keeping jobs in the States, wouldn't that create an environment where corporations will merely threaten outsourcing for a tax break? Trump is doing nothing about solving the actual systemic issue. He's window dressing.

 

Nothing to be sorry about, just wanted to understand more.

I have to agree - seriously, he lies and promise his way to winning over every groups possible. But people need to believe in it too and many are too readily willing to, at least the first time around.

If Clinton did the same, I suspect it wouldn't work as well, if it doesn't back fire right into her face.

 

I think it was a great first move as the "get er done" guy


Really that's it
The government won't shut down over those tax breaks. I'm speaking from a Trump as candidate level

 

I am willing to accept some negatives in order to achieve some positives or avoid other negatives. This election, like all elections but perhaps moreso, was one of choosing the lesser of two evils. I voted third party, because my vote in California makes no practical difference, but if I was limited to Clinton or Trump, I would have picked Trump. In other words, your final question is based on a faulty premise. Neither candidate, neither party, neither wing of American politics would lead to a healthy country. Each would just mess up the country in different ways. I would prefer the country be messed up in the way that takes less money out of my pocket, restricts less of my personal freedoms, doesn't pick winners and losers based on race, orientation, gender, etc., tries to protect the unborn, and so on. It isn't like I enjoy elephants more than donkeys, and thus want more Republicans to win. Dominance in politics leads to, hopefully, more of the ideals represented by the dominant party being advanced. Even if they don't get advanced, perhaps the ideals represented by the other party that I oppose will be stymied.

 

Man... and all I wanted for someone who's job it is to head the executive branch of government is a nuanced understanding of constitutional law, our legislative process, geopolitical knowledge and is willing to read 20 page intelligence briefings and comprehend them.

I'm sorry, but anyone who actually believes that Trump was the lesser of two evils from a purely pragmatic standpoint rather than some vague ideological standpoint at this point is a flat out idiot.

 

My first job out of college was at a bank training to be loan officer at a bank catering to small businesses

That's where that comment came from.

In that sense I totally understand what you're saying about local government

 

You are right, you do live in a bubble. And that is the problem.

I've lived in a Muslim country 30+ years, does that make all your views of Islam incorrect vs mine?

Understand your bias. You being in the military means a huge propaganda assault on your brain + a non-representative sample of soldiers + Texas is not the problem.

Again, you are looking for a cop out. None of the people you met are seeking a coal or manufacturing job does not change what I said. The people you were with have been radicalized to believe that they have to join the military because of a terrorist rather than because of what has happened to where they are from.

If you want to believe that them voting for a rich new yorker with loose morals is cultural, go right ahead.

 

You are so out of touch. The propaganda doesn't come from the military. The people who chose to join professions like Marine Corps infantry on average lean heavily right wing. It's who the military attracts, not what they teach.

Does being a Muslim that lived in the States make someone less of a Muslim than someone who lives in a Muslim dominant region? You living 30+ years in a Muslim dominant region that most likely frowned upon opposing criticism of the religion probably made you more brainwashed than 'informed'.

You are so out of touch with our current political situation. People vote based in emotion and party affiliation more so than nuanced economic policy. Hillary could have expressed her desire to train those who have been displaced by outsourcing and automation which she did, but they wouldn't give two *****. It's a sports team competition and the liberal cucks must lose.

 

You are living a fantasy you've created for yourself. The people who ARE in there do no agree with you and neither do I. I get that that's your opinion, and I find it a ****ing shame you spent so much time in the bubble and came out with a shallow, cartoonish view of the situation.

Also, you are not a Muslim living in the states. You were a Muslim living in the states and your experience is heavily influenced by your family because you haven't lived in Muslim societies. I have lived on several sides of the fence - I've lived in Germany, Turkey, Dubai. My parents are originated from the GCC, Iran and India. I'm American educated and speak 5 languages. My sister in law and her family - who I've known since I was 8 - are from Kentucky and now live in SPO Cali. My 2 brothers spent their entire college life in Texas while I was in school, and my direct uncle has lived there for 40 years. I went to a high school of over 40 nationalities - and I don't mean 40 origins, I mean 40 nationalities. I've visited by now something like 60+ countries in every continent in various stages of development, and not with a gun in my hand and a military uniform. I spent my first 7 professional years working almost exclusively with Brits, Germans, Dutch and Australians. I am speaking to you right now in YOUR native tongue. So you can shove your brainwashing comment where the sun don't shine. If I was brainwashed, I would be waving YOUR flag. I would be saying what YOU are saying. That those Americans are just what they are, has nothing to do with socio economics. That's what the brainwashers are pushing. Your experience being a Muslim is a nice little angle. But it remains anecdotal and extremely limited, just like my experience with it remains anecdotal. Which is why I didn't include anecdotes in my argument. I just stated facts about what has happened to a specific group of people.

All people vote based on emotion to varying degrees, those who have been shat on more tend to be more emotional of course. I never said they voted for nuanced economic policy. I even specifically said they are not represented. They voted for Donald Trump because those things happened to them, you have yet to make even a reasonable subjective argument towards that. Neither your income stat nor your divisive caricature addresses that those things happened, and those people have been hurting for decades, and they voted for Donald Trump while yelling those things out loud and Donald Trump deceitfully yelled what they were yelling through a megaphone. If I were susceptible to the kinds of arguments you are making, my BRAINWASHING might lead me to believe that low income workers in this region are a product of culture. But I don't believe in that stuff. I believe that when people say they're f'ed, and you do a little digging, you find that they are really f'ed. And it doesn't matter if other people are f'ed too. It doesn't change the fact that how they feel and how they're treated determines how they act.

As for Hillary, it's hilarious you call me out of touch and say stupid **** like that. You can't wipe away decades of being a corporate shill by suddenly making a statement that goes against everything she's ever done. She had absolutely no potential to achieve anything, her record is out there, overly scrutinized and even optimistically it is a terrible record for the people living in Trumpland. If you're not going to believe Hillary or Trump, and you live in Trumpland, then of course you are going to vote Trump. At least he's TALKING **** to the people who screwed them, if not actually acting on it.

 

My reaction to the article is this. Mr. Bartlett represents a Republican party that was losing elections to the likes of Bill Clinton, Barak Obama, Nancy Pelosi, Harry Reid and the DNC of the last 20 years. Trump and the populist movement (for all its faults) are winning elections. At the end of the day, results matter even if the only thing they accomplish is to stop the opposition party from enacting its agenda. As a recently elected public official once said "Elections have consequences."

These results show the people (Conservatives and Moderates alike) reject his characterization of how great the Republican party used to be and how bad it currently is...

OR

....as I believe...the results of recent elections are a reaction to the Democrat party and its massive swing towards socialism. The country is a center right country. The Democrat party of 2017 (vs. say the Democrat party of 1992) is almost unrecognizable.

 

B-Bob

I read the article. I have a simple reaction. Becoming the anti-government came to fruition under Obama.

Trump is where the party has been for a while.

 

It would be nice if the President had all of those qualities, yes. Those are not the only qualities I would want them to have though, which I guess is one of our differences.

Politics is almost inherently an ideological exercise though. I, for one, am much more concerned with the ideology of the President than their pragmatic abilities. There is a vast government bureaucracy to help the President deal with pragmatic issues. If Trump doesn't read 20 page intelligence briefings, there are people on his staff who do. Obama had plenty of understanding of constitutional law, but that didn't stop him from pushing blatantly unconstitutional policies. Ideologically and from my perspective, Trump is the lesser evil to Hillary, though both are dumpster fires. The fact that Trump may have more difficulty advancing his poor ideas in comparison to what Clinton could do with her worse ideas is a feature, not a bug.[/QUOTE]

 

Their party has already won all chambers of government but that hasn't filled the void of their insecurities.

They're like scared little ostriches opting to defer responsibility by blaming the other side.

Enjoy that small small piece of the tax cuts those evil libs "stole" from you.

 

They are winning because they took the position of taking advantage of the economic weaknesses following the worst modern economic crisis while blasting Obama for everything.

This situation reminds me of Bush Jr to where the GOP are in position to lose it all quickly when they have to start actually implementing policy instead of casting stones.