• This is a political forum that is non-biased/non-partisan and treats every person's position on topics equally. This debate forum is not aligned to any political party. In today's politics, many ideas are split between and even within all the political parties. Often we find ourselves agreeing on one platform but some topics break our mold. We are here to discuss them in a civil political debate. If this is your first visit to our political forums, be sure to check out the RULES. Registering for debate politics is necessary before posting. Register today to participate - it's free!

Donald Trump and Willie Loman

Jack Hays

Traveler
Banned
DP Veteran
Joined
Jan 28, 2013
Messages
94,823
Reaction score
28,343
Location
Williamsburg, Virginia
Gender
Male
Political Leaning
Independent
In Death of a Salesman it is said of Willie Loman: "Attention, attention must be paid to such a person." I wonder whether that might be an accurate capsule explanation of DJT's appeal to a large chunk of his voter base. Ignored and/or ridiculed for a long time, those voters wanted attention to be paid, not just to their interests and views, but to themselves as persons of value. It was DJT's insight to see that need and meet it. Ironic? Perhaps. But he found votes others didn't see. I wonder what Arthur Miller would say?
 

The silent majority is silent no more
 
Personally I think the fictional inspiration for DJT's success in getting elected is more owed to Vince Macmahan and the WWE.

He did everything that an anti hero would do to gain fanatical support from WWE fans. Insult people, make outrageous statements that they all knew were not real.

He is the Stone Cold President, without the beer drinking. As he said he could shoot someone in the middle of the street and his supporters would still support him
 

What you're saying is that DJT did a great job echoing the concerns of Republicans. That he did. That's what got him elected.

Well, THAT plus Putin changing the votes, Director Comey committing treason, the lies about Benghazi, the lies about Bill Clinton's clandestine meeting on the tarmac, the lies about HC calling Republicans deplorables, Russian sleepers keeping HC from visiting the swing states often enough, the Electoral College cheating and lying, and more interference than you can shake a stick at...
 

Thats actually a very clever - and hopefully original - spin.

Well done
 
Lord Tammerlain said:
You mean minority, he did not receive the majority of votes
Click to expand...

Neither did the business-as-usual establishment candidate

Trump got 62 million

Add 6 million who sat on the fence and the Silent Majority won in a landslide
 
MaggieD said:
Have the Democrats introduced a proposed amendment to the Constitution abolishing the Electoral College yet?
Click to expand...

Which has what to do with what I posted and what I quoted in my post?

Did DJT win the election, yes, did he receive the most electoral votes in this election yes. Was the majority of voters ie silent majority voting for DJT or other people yes.
 
Mac77 said:
Neither did the business-as-usual establishment candidate

Trump got 62 million

Add 6 million who sat on the fence and the Silent Majority won in a landslide
Click to expand...


Again not a majority, a plurality yes but not majority.
 
Lord Tammerlain said:
Counting people who did not vote for Trump as voting for Trump,

Sound logic,
Click to expand...

I said the Silent Majority won over the establishment candidate

Which is true

Most of them voted for trump but a few didn't
 
Mac77 said:
I said the Silent Majority won over the establishment candidate

Which is true

Most of them voted for trump but a few didn't
Click to expand...

To which you are incorrect

He won the election due to the electoral college, not the number of people voting for him. A minority of voters voted for him, not the majority
 
Lord Tammerlain said:
To which you are incorrect

He won the election due to the electoral college, not the number of people voting for him. A minority of voters voted for him, not the majority
Click to expand...

The anti establishment candidates got more votes than the establishment hack, aka bill clintons coattails, aka the Cookie Lady, aka Hillary

trumps 62 million plus 6 million who voted third party exceeded hillary's 65 million
 

I don't think it's attention that his voters were looking for. Some percentage (maybe 25%) of Trump voters either liked his "in your face" style or just plain wanted to give the establishment a big FU. Another 60% or so voted for Trump because they couldn't fathom 4-8 years of Hillary in the White House. The other 15% were just plain sick and tired of being called racist, tired of being told they couldn't succeed without direct government help and tired of being taken for granted by an establishment that generally ignored them other than when it came time to vote. People simply got tired of being pandered to by both parties.
 

I don't know the correct percentages but some or all of the above applies

However trump made promises on issues that are important to his voters

So there is an intellectual basis for trump support underlying everything
 

You might want to recheck the definition of "pander". I've seen this misapplication of the word a lot recently.
It's specially ironic when Trump-supporters misuse the term.
 
Lord Tammerlain said:
To which you are incorrect

He won the election due to the electoral college, not the number of people voting for him. A minority of voters voted for him, not the majority
Click to expand...

I believe they are referring to the majority of the silent majority, which might not be a majority at all, but they are generally politically quiet. There is no hard and fast definition of that group, but when they speak as a group they do influence elections. This was one of those times when people of a similar demographic heavily influenced the election outcome. Nearly all of them are strongly focused on economic matters, and that crosses traditional party ties. Never doubt the superior pull of the wallet when compared to other electoral considerations. It's not the only thing - just the biggest.
 

For sure the ONLY reason Trump was able to win this election is that he was the ONLY candidate out there, and I do mean the ONLY candidate out there who did have the guts to say what we were thinking, who was not afraid of the media and the more rabid leftwing when he chose to be completely politically incorrect, and who offered a path that broke with the status quo.

Was he undisciplined at times? It would appear so at first blush, but the more I stand back and analyze what was happening, I am less convinced of that. I think every provocative statement that invited intense speculation and translation and massive discussion, every tweet, every comment on Facebook or whatever, could possibly have been completely deliberate for purposes of achieving a specific goal.

He obviously was able to play the media like a fiddle. The more he was able to get them to attack him, the better he looked to people who are sick and tired of status quo, prim and proper expected behavior, and stagnation and decline. And yes, he was on the side of all of us who the left and the establishment right wrote off as disposable 'tea baggers' and 'baskets of deplorables' etc. etc. etc.

Turns out there were a lot more of us than anybody thought.
 
RickJames3000 said:
... said no one ever, who wasn't an insecure Trump-supporter.
Click to expand...

I don't think I am insecure or I would have voted for hillary like all the beautiful people in the media and hollywood told me to
 
RickJames3000 said:
You might want to recheck the definition of "pander". I've seen this misapplication of the word a lot recently.
It's specially ironic when Trump-supporters misuse the term.
Click to expand...

Why? What do you have against cute black and white bears?
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Menu
Log in
Register
Cookies are required to use this site. You must accept them to continue using the site. Learn more…