Yeah, so basically, we're fucked unless somebody gets trump to ride in an open topped Lincoln.
The Trump Presidency - how I stopped worrying and learned to love the Hair
- Thread starter Interrobang
- Start date
Cellos88GT
Well-Known Member
I would like to remind everyone that the people that voted for Trump are still fucking morons and I don't give a shit about why people voted for him.
PelicanHazard
Well-Known Member
- Joined
- Feb 22, 2008
- Messages
- 2,507
- Location
- Pittsburgh, PA, USA
- Car(s)
- '13 Dart, '03 Ranger, '20 390 Duke, '22 K16GTL
I don't think it's gotten to the point yet where this is the better option. But every day that passes causes more harm to American international relations, nevermind what it's doing internally.
Firecat
Politically Charged
- Joined
- Mar 23, 2005
- Messages
- 5,730
I'm a bit on the fence again. Like when I hear arguments about how trump is destroying American institutions etc...part of me thinks good. Maybe when the dust settles (and he's gone) we can actually make improvements.
that's still the one upside to a trump presidency.
that's still the one upside to a trump presidency.
PelicanHazard
Well-Known Member
- Joined
- Feb 22, 2008
- Messages
- 2,507
- Location
- Pittsburgh, PA, USA
- Car(s)
- '13 Dart, '03 Ranger, '20 390 Duke, '22 K16GTL
This is making the assumption that both parties would want the same improvements, which I don't think is true.
What could they agree to improve? Put net neutrality into law instead of leaving it to FCC directives? I don't see the GOP agreeing to that since it's additional regulations on business. Electoral college reform? Again, I don't see that happening from either party, since the two most likely reform paths would face either GOP stonewalling or Democratic wariness (and the GOP has more to lose in the reform). A series of laws to return powers Congress gave to the executive over the decades? Why do that when it's much easier and politically effective just to blame the (opposing party's) president come election time than face responsibility?
Firecat
Politically Charged
- Joined
- Mar 23, 2005
- Messages
- 5,730
That's the larger problem of course. We need a complete change on every level including congress. The hope is that Post-trump we actually get a real reformer.
Also the hope is that people wake up and stop electing the same representatives
Yes I know this is very naive. Pie in the sky. Wishful thinking. But it's all we have left at this point. It's trump. Pence. Or whatever pathetic Democratic wimp is nominated in 2020
Also the hope is that people wake up and stop electing the same representatives
Yes I know this is very naive. Pie in the sky. Wishful thinking. But it's all we have left at this point. It's trump. Pence. Or whatever pathetic Democratic wimp is nominated in 2020
PelicanHazard
Well-Known Member
- Joined
- Feb 22, 2008
- Messages
- 2,507
- Location
- Pittsburgh, PA, USA
- Car(s)
- '13 Dart, '03 Ranger, '20 390 Duke, '22 K16GTL
And a disturbingly large number of millions voted for the idiotology that is libertarianism, may that number only fall. So as you see Firecat, complete reform is practically impossible. The best you can hope for is some small-level reform that codifies some notable pitfalls, like requiring candidates to release tax returns.
MacGuffin
Forum Addict
- Joined
- Mar 29, 2008
- Messages
- 8,329
- Location
- Wilhelmshaven, Germany
- Car(s)
- '17 Ford Mustang GT Fastback
A country where half of the voters elect a man like Donald Trump, has much bigger worries than socialism or libertarianism. Believing Trump is still better than that is like jumping into a buzzsaw, saying it's still better than a headache.
I've been wondering how long it might take for the more intelligent among the Trump voters to realize they did wrong and to admit it. Apparently most of them are still suffering from a kind of "Voter's Stockholm Syndrome" and keep defending their decision to elect him, even though everyone can see now that it was a bad idea.
I've been wondering how long it might take for the more intelligent among the Trump voters to realize they did wrong and to admit it. Apparently most of them are still suffering from a kind of "Voter's Stockholm Syndrome" and keep defending their decision to elect him, even though everyone can see now that it was a bad idea.
SirEdward
Well-Known Member
^they won't.
You will see the smarter Trump voters -privately- telling you they made a mistake only in 10-15 years. They won't because they still haven't felt the repercussions of Trump's idiocy, and they won't because the most important reason why they voted Trump is still right there: Trump really was different from the mentally and probably technically corrupt people they could choose instead.
People are suffering, compared to the past, lack of opportunities, reduced wealth, more problems; the entire (western) system is declining compared to the rest of the world and to its past. Still rich enough to be richer, but way poorer than before, and no one is giving them answers on why and on how to change (because changing means rethinking the core of the western (and now global) economic system).
The Western countries are today on the losing end, they are declining and nothing of what has been done up to now can make a difference, because the decline is coming from within, from the way the Western World has acted in the last few decades, from letting its own greed go wild in the false assurance that the fall of the past enemy meant complete victory, for having lost sight of the fact that what made the West so powerful resided also in its cultural unity and its common values (freedom, justice, equality), now all diluted and less important than money.
People feel this, and try everything they can to change. The will vote for Trump (in the USA) or for other disruptive forces (in the EU), they will try something different, and if this new force is terrible (which is easy to assess even before voting), they will go for the change nonetheless, and they will not tell you they made a mistake.
Because they didn't: they did go for the change, they did what they wanted, and there was only one choice they could take.
Was the change a good one? Of course not, but since they wanted change, nobody will answer you before having felt directly the consequences of this change, and nobody still has, honestly: we see the Trump change coming, like a storm far away, but still nothing has changed here, not even a gust of wind has raised.
In 10-15 years, when the storm will have brewed and blown all across their (and our) lives, they will tell you if they were wrong or not. Provided they are smart people. Idiots are unrescuable.
You will see the smarter Trump voters -privately- telling you they made a mistake only in 10-15 years. They won't because they still haven't felt the repercussions of Trump's idiocy, and they won't because the most important reason why they voted Trump is still right there: Trump really was different from the mentally and probably technically corrupt people they could choose instead.
People are suffering, compared to the past, lack of opportunities, reduced wealth, more problems; the entire (western) system is declining compared to the rest of the world and to its past. Still rich enough to be richer, but way poorer than before, and no one is giving them answers on why and on how to change (because changing means rethinking the core of the western (and now global) economic system).
The Western countries are today on the losing end, they are declining and nothing of what has been done up to now can make a difference, because the decline is coming from within, from the way the Western World has acted in the last few decades, from letting its own greed go wild in the false assurance that the fall of the past enemy meant complete victory, for having lost sight of the fact that what made the West so powerful resided also in its cultural unity and its common values (freedom, justice, equality), now all diluted and less important than money.
People feel this, and try everything they can to change. The will vote for Trump (in the USA) or for other disruptive forces (in the EU), they will try something different, and if this new force is terrible (which is easy to assess even before voting), they will go for the change nonetheless, and they will not tell you they made a mistake.
Because they didn't: they did go for the change, they did what they wanted, and there was only one choice they could take.
Was the change a good one? Of course not, but since they wanted change, nobody will answer you before having felt directly the consequences of this change, and nobody still has, honestly: we see the Trump change coming, like a storm far away, but still nothing has changed here, not even a gust of wind has raised.
In 10-15 years, when the storm will have brewed and blown all across their (and our) lives, they will tell you if they were wrong or not. Provided they are smart people. Idiots are unrescuable.
Last edited:
MacGuffin
Forum Addict
- Joined
- Mar 29, 2008
- Messages
- 8,329
- Location
- Wilhelmshaven, Germany
- Car(s)
- '17 Ford Mustang GT Fastback
I don't think the Western philosophy or the "system" are responsible. The system is made and steered by humans after all.
The real problem is the distribution of wealth: The rich getting richer and the poor getting poorer.
The USA are the most extreme country in that respect and that's why a president Trump happened there, while a Geert Wilders in the Netherlands or a Marine Le Pen in France did not.
For decades the USA could, on a political level, camouflage the fact that there was a huge gap between the poor and the rich. In certain areas, the USA are a country on the same level with countries in the third world while in other areas they're the best and the brightest of them all. At first glance, the philosophy of America is compelling but it's also quite brutal because it's parted in winners and losers: If you live in moderate wealth and satisfaction, you are a winner. If not, you are a loser. That could only work as long as they had a satisfied middle class that, everything considered, was doing rather well.
That ended with the financial crisis of 2009. Since then the American middle class has been shrinking and getting poorer - much quicker and much more radical than in other Western countries - and that's where the Trump voters are coming from. But instead of voting for someone who could have actually helped them, they voted for a stupid narcist who is completely unfit for the job. Why? Because Trump supposedly represents the winner side of the USA, despite the fact that he is a complete asshole and most people who had to deal with him, hate him.
It's like the geek club hiring the biggest bully of the school as leader for a science project in the hope it will all make them very popular.
Trump won't solve anything. After his presidency, life will be a lot worse for those who voted for him. And I'm wondering what will happen then. Will they vote for an even more extreme candidate?
The real problem is the distribution of wealth: The rich getting richer and the poor getting poorer.
The USA are the most extreme country in that respect and that's why a president Trump happened there, while a Geert Wilders in the Netherlands or a Marine Le Pen in France did not.
For decades the USA could, on a political level, camouflage the fact that there was a huge gap between the poor and the rich. In certain areas, the USA are a country on the same level with countries in the third world while in other areas they're the best and the brightest of them all. At first glance, the philosophy of America is compelling but it's also quite brutal because it's parted in winners and losers: If you live in moderate wealth and satisfaction, you are a winner. If not, you are a loser. That could only work as long as they had a satisfied middle class that, everything considered, was doing rather well.
That ended with the financial crisis of 2009. Since then the American middle class has been shrinking and getting poorer - much quicker and much more radical than in other Western countries - and that's where the Trump voters are coming from. But instead of voting for someone who could have actually helped them, they voted for a stupid narcist who is completely unfit for the job. Why? Because Trump supposedly represents the winner side of the USA, despite the fact that he is a complete asshole and most people who had to deal with him, hate him.
It's like the geek club hiring the biggest bully of the school as leader for a science project in the hope it will all make them very popular.
Trump won't solve anything. After his presidency, life will be a lot worse for those who voted for him. And I'm wondering what will happen then. Will they vote for an even more extreme candidate?
Last edited:
Firecat
Politically Charged
- Joined
- Mar 23, 2005
- Messages
- 5,730
I think if we look at polling, the American public is more progressive than we give them credit for. Trump received 65million votes in a country that has a population of 325 million. So I don't know how represented his views are.
If the dems didn't act like swines, we quite possibly would have been seeing a lot of positive change with a Sanders presidency instead of this panic under a Trump presidency. Sanders represented the kind of populism that we needed, and I think people would have gone for.
But what we have now are representatives who don't represent the people, just their corporate interests. Then they convince the public what they want and put them against the "other side" and it's just a cycle of bullshit. That's why things don't get done. It's a game to them. They are entrenched in their party politics and fight to hold control. This is precisely what Trump campaigned on and why people voted for him.....but he was conning them of course.
Point is, the American public does want change. We may not end up agreeing on things but if we can at least elect people that give a shit it would be a positive first step.
If the dems didn't act like swines, we quite possibly would have been seeing a lot of positive change with a Sanders presidency instead of this panic under a Trump presidency. Sanders represented the kind of populism that we needed, and I think people would have gone for.
But what we have now are representatives who don't represent the people, just their corporate interests. Then they convince the public what they want and put them against the "other side" and it's just a cycle of bullshit. That's why things don't get done. It's a game to them. They are entrenched in their party politics and fight to hold control. This is precisely what Trump campaigned on and why people voted for him.....but he was conning them of course.
Point is, the American public does want change. We may not end up agreeing on things but if we can at least elect people that give a shit it would be a positive first step.
PelicanHazard
Well-Known Member
- Joined
- Feb 22, 2008
- Messages
- 2,507
- Location
- Pittsburgh, PA, USA
- Car(s)
- '13 Dart, '03 Ranger, '20 390 Duke, '22 K16GTL
Just to touch on this briefly, I've gotten some anecdotes that I find very illuminating. A couple of people from the next county over were very ardent Trump supporters, plastering it all over Facebook and affirming multiple times on and after the election how proud they were to vote for him. When shit started predictably hitting the fan, they went quiet, and now when it comes up, they insist they voted for Clinton and are therefore not responsible for this mess.
It might take them 10-15 to readmit they voted for him, but they already see what a bad choice that was.
rickhamilton620
has a fetish for terrible cars
Another PA anecdote. When the shit started hitting the fan, you saw the yard signs come down, posts slow down, etc., but recently they're making a comeback, the rebel flags are being hung again, etc.
It's like people are pissed that their boy is caught out so they're outwardly voicing their support of him again.
On social media (local newspaper comments) there's still many Trumpers who insist he's for them, he's doing a great job, etc.
There's definitely people who've realized they've been duped. But there's just as many with a nearly blind allegiance to him, citing things that he didn't have a impact on to begin with. His ongoing rallies to keep his base energized and spoonfed lies do not help.
SirEdward
Well-Known Member
Exactly; and this is a systemic effect, based on how the mechanics moving the world work. And precisely for this reason, besides him being a complete madman, he will not succeed in making anything better (BTW, the fact that he got so rich by being a nutjob is an error of the system as well, favored and fed by opportunism and greed). He is the champion of this system.
It depends -a lot- on who the candidates will be. Give them another Clinton, and they will vote another Trump.
I agree. Sanders has the problem of the demented progressive extremists, but if he can control that, he might do well.
Exactly. This is part of the systemic problems I see. When politics is so weak that it can be colonized by money, politics will only express corporate interests.
At the moment, I don't see anyone around western societies who might be capable of the needed political swing. I think the US could well be the country expressing that change before all others, but it still isn't there.
Idiots can be rescued, unfortunately. They will lie to you in 10 years as they have lied to you now. But those who will feel ashamed for voting Trump, they will tell it was a mistake.
narf
Sgt. Maj. Buzzkill
Remember when Trump was complaining about FLOTUS not covering her hair?