(CNN) Why I'm voting for Trump. A look inside Trump's supporters
- Thread starter Slayven
- Start date
- Status
Team Alucard
Banned
Mass_Pincup
Banned
This is insane.
"Anybody can turn bad but let's track this specific group of people though"
Massive Duck. C.M.
Banned
Eh, I actually like Hex. Let's keep it to losers
diablos991
Can’t stump the diablos
I bought a house before 25 after my first bachelor degree.
But then again I don't really follow the mindset of today's millenials.
We do need to remove special interests from politics though. We only need to increase taxes if said taxes are being spent appropriately.
I can see eye to eye with you on this. We've got to do whatever we can to make sure the Trumps of this country can't fan flames like this.
Pumped for the Trump dump, bumped for the stumped lump in yo rump. -Gump
Nice anecdote. Good for you.
demosthenes
Member
About what?
You don't see how the rest of the world population exploding and not wanting to live on cents a day might adversely effect the very high lifestyles proportionate to a lot of the world that Americans have had? This seems like common sense to me.
Poster claims it's impossible to buy a house before 25.
Poster claims he did.
No reason to be snarky.
theignoramus
Member
CNN video journalism leaves much to be desired, but their print articles are okay.
This piece here is an excellent, comprehensive article. They covered Trump's rallies exhaustively, spoke to a huge sampling of his supporters and are simply giving a brutally frank portrait of his base.
Whats especially alarming is the belief in conspiracy theories, like Obama being a covert Muslim born in Kenya. Imagine what your worldview would be if you bombarded yourself with a feedback loop of FoxNews, DrudgeReport, Rush Limbaugh, Glenn Beck, Michael Savage, and (shudders) Alex Jones, telling you how many boogeymen and bad guys are out trying to fuck you over.
I would love to meet these people and just question these statements and ask them for examples. It will be like talking to a brick wall but I just want to know if they are just parroting the right wing media or they can back up their statements.
I will miss Obama, he was a good president and in my opinion far better than America deserved.
I will miss Obama, he was a good president and in my opinion far better than America deserved.
FO-totality
Poet Centuriate
But Rorschach is as close to a protagonist as Watchmen has
So he can't possibly be a Paul
Angelus Errare
Banned
Hey man I'm just saying, these people are always saying that minorities are given special treatment, get overall better treatment, taking/have all the jobs, etc.
You'd think these Trump fans would be excited to become the minority!
HP_Wuvcraft
Banned
The Anyone Can Turn Bad part was what got me.
It's basically the same thing as "blacks steal; they don't know why, they just do".
Which is why it's an education issue. On average millennials are immensely more educated than baby boomers.
Millennials are first gen to grow up in the Information Age.
At it's core, I think it's a mix of white privilege and also I hate the government burn it all down.
HP_Wuvcraft
Banned
Without joking, Trump's supporters are basically the Gamergate of politics.
There's definitely a significant amount of GGers who are Trump supporters.
HP_Wuvcraft
Banned
I was more referencing how some people support Trump who are not racist shits.
Vicetrailia
Banned
We'll see. Dems seem to wish that things work more automatically than they do. The only problem is that we are far from that.
HP_Wuvcraft
Banned
They probably see no problem with Stormfront either.
A Link to the Past
Banned
Clarify - are you accusing Obama of having been responsible for why Wall Street crashed?
He came into an economic crash and basically had to scramble to make up for what Bush did.
Link
The Autumn Wind
Frozenprince
Banned
Honestly. If he makes it out of the Primary at this point I'd be stunned. He's selling his soul for a voter base that is not sustainable, nor able to carry him in a general.
Of course, I say this under the assumption that people in my age range (20-28 year olds) will actually get off their lazy fucking asses and vote, when most can't even be asked to learn more about a politician than his or her fucking name. So, I'm tentative.
Of course, I say this under the assumption that people in my age range (20-28 year olds) will actually get off their lazy fucking asses and vote, when most can't even be asked to learn more about a politician than his or her fucking name. So, I'm tentative.
That's not at ALL what I'm saying. I said over and over Obama continued Bush's failed policies, which made America worse! Bush's Treasury Fed Ben Bernakie was behind the stock market crash, and guess who Obama hired to be in charge of the Treasury? Ben Bernakie, the very same dude! It's amazing folks are still ignoring the damage Bush and Obama has done to this country. I'm an progressive liberal. I hate these policies under Bush, and I hate these policies under Obama, because they're bad policies! Go look up which administration posted the largest profits for Wallstreet in history: It was under the Obama administration, while wages for average Americans are at an 60 year low! This is facts!!!
Frozenprince
Banned
Alan Greenspan and his desire to put everything that resembled asset deficiencies/downturns is what destroyed the market.
The system was built with a net in place. It was doomed to fail the minute they conceived the system in the first place.
Who was the one that was pumping millions of dollars per day into wallstreet? Ben Berndakie. I rest my case! Look..this shall serve as my final reply on this subject because times are really bad now. We had 7 plus years of Obama to fix things,, but it's still bad, if not worse. There is anger on both sides of the political spectrum, because we're ALL suffering these past two administrations. Obama has failed us all.....except for wallstreet, and some gay rights.
Your economic woes do not arise from the minority and immigrants but from the subtly racist system you are trying your very best in preserving.
All because deep down you know you have far great odds of succeeding based on your skin colour, and that's not something you want to change.
All because deep down you know you have far great odds of succeeding based on your skin colour, and that's not something you want to change.
Right, because ONLY those that work on wallstreet should be allowed to talk about the economy. Thank you for clearing that up. :/
AaronB
Member
A crash has always been followed by a recovery; even back in the days when the government did basically nothing. In fact, one of the fastest and strongest recoveries ever occurred following the 1920-21 depression - the last one in the US where the government actually reduced its spending, and recovered back to strong growth in 9 months.
Obama, on the other hand, has managed a recovery that exploded the debt; reduced unemployment through a combination of people dropping out of the workforce and low-paying jobs; and left the economy still too fragile for the Fed to raise rates after 7 years of alleged recovery.
He hasn't started a new land war (although he tried for greater intervention in Syria, which the public thankfully rejected), but he expanded and extended the war in Afghanistan and certainly hasn't resolved in Iraq. Obama inherited a mess, but is leaving the next president with an even worse one. People forget even W inherited a mess, as the dotcom bubble that had inflated the Clinton economy burst right around the time Clinton was leaving office. It doesn't follow that Bush did an ok job.
zero shift
Banned
Millennials aren't as liberal as you think. In reality they support some left wing policies, but once taxes get in the equation or debt, they flip sides. Yes yes it was commissioned by the Reason Foundation, but the actual surveying was done by YouGov. Yes it is true that they are more for gay rights and universal healthcare. However they also want a smaller government with fewer services, most don't want "government to solve our problems", the 2/3rds think when something is ran by the government it is usually wasteful and inefficient, most don't think business profits are too high or that their taxes are too low, and don't get me started on their feelings of minority rights especially in the regards of affirmative action. Not saying we are going to have a Tea Party revolution, but the future certainly won't be as "liberal" as most people believe. The American left are out of touch with the populace and are underestimating the conservative mindset...yet again.
Principate
Saint Titanfall
No he didn't have you even looked at the US debt statistics before he took office and currently or even other countries have dealt with the economic recession (hint their not all doing as well as America is), the troop deployment figures speak for theselves, I love how you ignore how the US wars have cost them over a trillion dollars and were a major contributor to the debt, because of cause he inhereited all his problems.
None one if those points even describe
Obama as just as bad Bush's Presidency as he didn't start a single one of those problems, and seriously do you think some magical US President would have solder America's problems far quicker and better than Obama did in all respects, Because Bush certainly fucked up America on all measurable effects in comparison to his predessor the stats speak for themselves.
NullPointer
Member
Except for all the services they rely upon of course. Small government my ass.
I've heard it from multiple people in Alabama. Not a niche idea at all among racists
AaronB
Member
Stats don't speak for themselves; they must be analyzed, placed into context, and interpreted. I've already done some of that in the last post - Obama and his supporters like to cherry-pick the number of jobs created during his administration, but they leave out how recoveries always tend to proceed following a recession, how many of those jobs are actually full-time and well-paid, and so on.
I criticize Obama for extending and expanding the existing wars. Where did you get that I was defending the wars? Obama didn't start any new major land wars (the country couldn't afford it and the military is already overstretched), but he did (with Hillary) help turn Libya and Syria into full-blown crises; expanded drone warfare; and even went as far as targeted extrajudicial killings of people including US citizens.
I already said Obama inherited his most significant problems. However, he's largely doubled-down on them (progress with Iran and Cuba being his only significant good accomplishments in my view).
AaronB
Member
To get back to Trump, how is it possible that this thread (and the article that spawned it) have largely missed the anti-establishment sentiments that have driven his candidacy?
The GOP establishment has not backed Trump. They are trying everything they can to undermine him, including using the "fascist" and "racist" labels that they typically decry liberals for using too freely against them. This entire election cycle, the GOP electorate has been in revolt against the party establishment. Jeb Bush got the money, he got the big endorsements, he got the big name and the connections - and he hasn't been able to get out of single digits in terms of support among actual voters. The other establishment-favored candidates have been similarly rejected - Christie, Kasich, Walker, Graham, and so on. They seem to be trying to rally around Rubio, but he's still a distant third.
The candidates who have actually gained traction among GOP voters - Trump, Cruz, and Carson - are all anti-establishment. One is black, and one is hispanic. Trying to view Trump's candidacy purely in terms of race misses the real point.
The GOP establishment has not backed Trump. They are trying everything they can to undermine him, including using the "fascist" and "racist" labels that they typically decry liberals for using too freely against them. This entire election cycle, the GOP electorate has been in revolt against the party establishment. Jeb Bush got the money, he got the big endorsements, he got the big name and the connections - and he hasn't been able to get out of single digits in terms of support among actual voters. The other establishment-favored candidates have been similarly rejected - Christie, Kasich, Walker, Graham, and so on. They seem to be trying to rally around Rubio, but he's still a distant third.
The candidates who have actually gained traction among GOP voters - Trump, Cruz, and Carson - are all anti-establishment. One is black, and one is hispanic. Trying to view Trump's candidacy purely in terms of race misses the real point.
Miles Quaritch
Member
Anti establishment in the sense of saying shit the other candidates know is socially and morally irresponsible and dangerous?
teruterubozu
Member
Cuz it's pretty much established that he's antiestablishment. The article looks into this antiestablishment sentiment. It's easy to say "I'm antiestablishment" but that could really mean anything at all. It's a very broad term. What are you against specifically? Why are you railing against the "establishment"? The article delves a little further into that question.
Then there's the entirely other question of: is Trump really antiestablishment? But that's a whole other topic.
AaronB
Member
Here's what I'm talking about when I say Trump is anti-establishment - the current GOP party leaders are trying to make sure he doesn't win the nomination. Who has been getting all the insider endorsements and the super-pac support, even without having poll support? Who is getting plugged on Fox News? Who is getting love from mainstream conservative media personalities? They are virtually unanimously against Trump.
If you keep tabs on conservative media a bit it's not a mystery who the establishment is trying to support and who they are trying to tear down. Bush was their first choice, followed by Rubio and most of the other failed candidates. They don't really like Cruz, seemingly more for personal issues rather than policy differences, and they never got behind Carson. Rand Paul is in an odd place where he tried to win the establishment over while also keeping his father's libertarian support, but wound up pleasing neither.
If you want to understand conservatism or the support for Trump, CNN isn't the best place to look. I'd recommend Tom Woods, especially his podcast - he was a conservative in his younger days (now libertarian), so he actually knows conservatism both from within and as a harsh critic: the factions within it, the history of the movement, the major personalities, and so on. He does a pretty entertaining podcast episode after each GOP primary debate, so the latest one should be up right about now.
If you keep tabs on conservative media a bit it's not a mystery who the establishment is trying to support and who they are trying to tear down. Bush was their first choice, followed by Rubio and most of the other failed candidates. They don't really like Cruz, seemingly more for personal issues rather than policy differences, and they never got behind Carson. Rand Paul is in an odd place where he tried to win the establishment over while also keeping his father's libertarian support, but wound up pleasing neither.
If you want to understand conservatism or the support for Trump, CNN isn't the best place to look. I'd recommend Tom Woods, especially his podcast - he was a conservative in his younger days (now libertarian), so he actually knows conservatism both from within and as a harsh critic: the factions within it, the history of the movement, the major personalities, and so on. He does a pretty entertaining podcast episode after each GOP primary debate, so the latest one should be up right about now.
TheLostBigBoss
Banned
what i should have said was that working on wall st gives you a lot of insight as to how badly the economy is stacked against the middle class
seeing so many people continue to vote for those who are systematicslly neutering the power and wealth of their own economic group is tough
I mean, this isn't a conspiracy. Polling shows Trump does not do well outside the Republican base. He doesn't pull in moderates and he motivates Democrats to vote against him. The financial establishment that benefit from a Republican in the White House want to back someone who has a better chance of making it to the White House.
It's not so much that he is somehow a fringe character who goes against the establishment. He's just not very likely to win in the general. He's only anti-establishment in that he's setting them up to lose an election.
Principate
Saint Titanfall
We were arguing about Bush in regards to Obama (if you were actually reading the conversation chain) and yes the stats do speak for themselves considering the state Bush left the economy and global affairs at in comparison to the level at which they are now. Even contextualized against recession recoveries, America actually did fairly well in comparison to most western countries. Even ignoring that the Obama Presidency would have to significantly blunder far worse than it actually did considering how catastrophic the Bush Presidency actually was, contextualised stats or no contextual stats, many of the problems America faced were specifically due to the actions of the Bush Presidency.
AaronB
Member
Do you really think the establishment picked Jeb Bush because he's electable? Or that there was some grassroots swell of support for Hillary Clinton that made her the presumptive nominee? The elites of the parties pick their people and try to make the public accept them. The difference this time is that the people on the GOP side are rejecting the candidates of their "betters" completely, and there's even a significant revolt for Bernie instead of Hillary on the Dem side.
And by the way, I wouldn't pick against Trump in the general election either. It would take a miracle for Trump to win the black or latino vote, but he's doing better among them than you might expect (or than other Republicans). The GOP establishment picked Romney, McCain, and Dole recently, so it's not like their approach is particularly successful. Hillary has extremely high unfavorable ratings as well, while Bernie's appeal is much deeper than it is broad.
Bush was a disaster in virtually every way, but America's major problems go much further back than Bush and/or were continued and expanded by Obama (interventionism abroad, the police state, the bailouts whenever politically favored big firms get in trouble; even the repeal of Glass Steagall if you think that red herring was actually significant).
If the US is doing better than most western countries right now that's an extremely low bar, because the EU is facing potential breakup from multiple angles. It doesn't follow that Obama has done well. Please don't make any more massive overstatements; I really hate defending Bush in any way.
- Status