For Trump's New Supporters

[imyoda]

This is a post directed towards individuals, and particularly individuals formerly with the #NeverTrump movement, that started off by criticizing Trump and his supporters, but have now migrated to a support, albeit grudging, for Trump.

I am curious whether you realize that one of the primary reasons that you support the man is because of Trump's core group of irrational supporters that supported him long enough for the 16 other candidates to slowly drop out of the race, thereby leaving him as the lone Republican choice.

Seriously, the man joked that he could kill someone in public and his supporters would still support him. Do you place yourself in that camp? No? Well, that means you are supporting someone almost specifically because he DID/DOES have those sorts of supporters and thus, lasted long enough to become the only nominee remaining.

The man has promised to build a wall while making Mexico pay for it, to ban muslims, and to put a 45% tariff on any business that moves overseas. Do you take him completely at his word? No? Well, that means you are supporting someone almost solely because he DID/DOES have supporters that believe those irrational promises and thus, supported him long enough to become the only nominee.

The man denigrated POWs, made fun of a disabled journalist, implied that a journalist asked a tough question because she was on her period, and called Mexicans rapists and drug dealers. Do you support that type of rhetoric? No? Well, that means you are supporting someone almost entirely because he DID/DOES have supporters that support that type of rhetoric and thus, supported him long enough to become the only nominee.

Now, of course - people will rationalize their decisions and sometimes for very rational justifications - a deep hatred for Hillary or particular policies that Democrats support, but I am just curious to hear from these individuals on their thought process to reach their current level of support for Trump.

You forgot to include..........CRAZY..........He is that too

 

[Casper]

What, voting for Clinton is NOT stupid? From my point of view I would rather gamble on the unknown of Trump than the known quantity of Clinton especially if I want change. First step in change is to change what you are doing. Trump fits the bill nicely in that regard.

Wrong again, voting for either is Stupid. Change for the sake of change without considering what sort of change you are going to get is not thinking but only reacting, not the way to run a Nation.

 

[bubbabgone]

I'd be interested to hear if any of them can articulate a case for Trump that doesn't reference Hillary, or the Democrat Party in general.

You make it sound like those aren't good enough reasons.

 

[SenorXm/Sirius]

Wrong again, voting for either is Stupid. Change for the sake of change without considering what sort of change you are going to get is not thinking but only reacting, not the way to run a Nation.

If there was a straight talking 'non-politician' running I would vote for him in a NY minute. But not someone like Trump. He's an ill-mannered, thin-skinned egomaniac. Someone like him dealing with other nations, and other leaders would be a disaster. The saying 'with great power comes great responsibility' comes to mind. Trump doesn't act responsible enough to have the power that comes with being POTUS.

Voting for someone like him for the sake of 'change' is not smart. There's too much at stake. Maybe he's shaken up to political pot enough so that in 2020 a responsible, straight taking non-politician will run who is responsible enough to be trusted.

 

[Captain America]

You know, we are all very blessed to live in this point in time of American history.

This is bigger than Trump or Clinton and their policies, (or in Trump's case, the lack thereof.)

This is a culture vote. The right blamed their losses on not being right-wing enough. We have witnessed rightwing politics sucking up to the popular consensus, mostly of their particular region, and we have watched congress go through a phase of worthlessness we never thought possible. Tea Party voters started the implosion and it has just got worse since, as we watch the GOP shatter in to splinters.

What we have here is a directional mandate. Trump and Clinton are merely the poster children and I couldn't think of two better representatives of the national divide.

Pulling in one direction, you got your Trump culture. They aren't THAT stupid. (Well, not ALL of them.) They know Trump is full of ****. They don't care. He is their "middle finger," they are flying at the nation as gays gets rights, confederate flags get banned or frowned upon, military intervention on sovereign nations is no longer taken as lightly as they would prefer. America is moving "to the left," as some would say, and they are freaking out. They find themselves standing outside the fire on too many issues to count, as society evolves with the times leaving them in the wake. They have bit their tongue for years and finally there is somebody standing on a stump saying that it's okay to hate messkin's and moo-slums and homos. Someone who plays on their bias and prejudice and gives them a sense of validation.

Pulling the other direction are people who prefer to advance freedoms and liberties across the board and put more emphasis on education, healthcare, infra structure, equality, and all that tree-hugger kinda of stuff.

It should be interesting to see how it plays out. :2wave:

 

[Fearandloathing]

You don't. But what you DO know is who Hillary would put on the bench. People that make Kagen look like Scalia. Trump supporters think it's better to roll the dice.

Huh?

Where the **** did I mention Hillary?

What the **** is wrong with you people? One tiny questioning criticism of dear leader and you guy go off the ****ing rails. Take out your anger over the Clintons with someone who gives a ****. If you can find ONE POST where I have said anything good about the Clintons and I will leave this site forever.

I voted decades ago and left. I live in Canada and we're laughing our asses off.

We're done

 

[polgara]

Huh?

Where the **** did I mention Hillary?

What the **** is wrong with you people? One tiny questioning criticism of dear leader and you guy go off the ****ing rails. Take out your anger over the Clintons with someone who gives a ****. If you can find ONE POST where I have said anything good about the Clintons and I will leave this site forever.

I voted decades ago and left. I live in Canada and we're laughing our asses off.

We're done

Greetings, F & L. :2wave:

I hope you have some sympathy for those of us who, because of unhappy and angry voters in the primaries, find that we're once again faced with the prospect of either not voting at all, or choosing the least disgusting candidate on the ballot in November, and that includes voters in both parties! Hell of a choice! :thumbdown:

 

[Cardinal]

Let me help you understand the Trump supporter at least in part. Trump is NOT supported because he can fix things, he is supported for one primary reason, that is he is the big bulbous hairy middle finger to the ruling class, the pc crowd and the SJW's. He is the exemplary example of the FU vote. He is their bull they set loose to destroy the china shop. They don't want to fix things they want to break the system they see as oppressing them, that's what Trump is supposed to do. So far he has succeeded.

Side note, I am on the fence still, I may vote for him or I may abstain. I don't quite know yet. If I do vote I will doing so as a FU vote.

And that's fine (in a manner of speaking) so long as they take credit for the chaos that follows such agenda. Thus far there has definitely been chaos (albeit on a smaller scale) and they show no signs of taking any responsibility. This tells me that when the chaos inevitably grows to a national and international scale that is proportionate to the level the office the Presidency allows, they will not only not take responsibility for it, they will not even celebrate it. It would be some small comfort, however bleak, if they did. But they won't, choosing to blame the Mexicans, the Muslims, the blacks, some Democrat, perhaps the Chinese or the Japanese or the Jews or who the hell knows. As things crumble, they'll blame everybody but themselves. As they always have and they always will.

 

[Fearandloathing]

Greetings, F & L. :2wave:

I hope you have some sympathy for those of us who, because of unhappy and angry voters in the primaries, find that we're once again faced with the prospect of either not voting at all, or choosing the least disgusting candidate on the ballot in November, and that includes voters in both parties! Hell of a choice! :thumbdown:

This is not the first time that I have been grateful for the draft which sent me to the country of my birth. You know, you've read my posts on Obama. I never thought there would come a day when I would compare him favorably with anyone. The Best choice is to back Bernie and then just not fund his silly ideas. At least he won't lead to war, which is possible between Hillary's ineptness and Trump's belligerence

 

[cpwill]

You make it sound like those aren't good enough reasons.

It's not a binary choice, so... yeah. They aren't.

Sent from my XT1526 using Tapatalk

 

[Fearandloathing]

You know, we are all very blessed to live in this point in time of American history.

This is bigger than Trump or Clinton and their policies, (or in Trump's case, the lack thereof.)

This is a culture vote. The right blamed their losses on not being right-wing enough. We have witnessed rightwing politics sucking up to the popular consensus, mostly of their particular region, and we have watched congress go through a phase of worthlessness we never thought possible. Tea Party voters started the implosion and it has just got worse since, as we watch the GOP shatter in to splinters.

What we have here is a directional mandate. Trump and Clinton are merely the poster children and I couldn't think of two better representatives of the national divide.

Pulling in one direction, you got your Trump culture. They aren't THAT stupid. (Well, not ALL of them.) They know Trump is full of ****. They don't care. He is their "middle finger," they are flying at the nation as gays gets rights, confederate flags get banned or frowned upon, military intervention on sovereign nations is no longer taken as lightly as they would prefer. America is moving "to the left," as some would say, and they are freaking out. They find themselves standing outside the fire on too many issues to count, as society evolves with the times leaving them in the wake. They have bit their tongue for years and finally there is somebody standing on a stump saying that it's okay to hate messkin's and moo-slums and homos. Someone who plays on their bias and prejudice and gives them a sense of validation.

Pulling the other direction are people who prefer to advance freedoms and liberties across the board and put more emphasis on education, healthcare, infra structure, equality, and all that tree-hugger kinda of stuff.

It should be interesting to see how it plays out. :2wave:

What we have here is massive separation between the elected and electors. The clown show that has been the Republican primary has demonstrated that politicians have lost ALL connection; have no idea what the people are saying.

You can't blame it all on the Republicans. I see numerous causes, not the least of which is absence of moral code. Clinton committed a felony and got away with it with political horsepower. Bush, well he was George, then Obama, the man who kept his presidency simply by waging war on his fellow Americans and the Republicans helped his cause by doing exactly the wrong thing

 

[Casper]

If there was a straight talking 'non-politician' running I would vote for him in a NY minute. But not someone like Trump. He's an ill-mannered, thin-skinned egomaniac. Someone like him dealing with other nations, and other leaders would be a disaster. The saying 'with great power comes great responsibility' comes to mind. Trump doesn't act responsible enough to have the power that comes with being POTUS.

Voting for someone like him for the sake of 'change' is not smart. There's too much at stake. Maybe he's shaken up to political pot enough so that in 2020 a responsible, straight taking non-politician will run who is responsible enough to be trusted.

I agree 100%, unfortunately some do not seem to be able to actually see any of that, even when one points it out to them, we are growing dumber as a People.

 

[MrT]

While there was certainly an understanding that the president should be be a statesman the basic principle of the Constitution was that our political system should primarily be a bottom up system which provided checks and balances along the way just in case some asshole made it to the top of the heap. It's why we have a bicameral legislature and why Senators were originally selected by the legislatures of their states. The idea was to keep political power as local as possible because that's where the most accountability would be.

I agree that such a defensive mechanism provides me some comfort when it comes to the prospect of a Trump Presidency; however, I wonder why you would mention that fact?


Does a Trump supporter [if you don't support him, just pretend that I am asking about the hypothetical supporter] simultaneously hope that the person getting into office will "kick over the whole system" while simultaneously being controlled and put into check by that very same system?

 

[MrT]

What do you know that suggests Trump's appointments would be any better? We know this guy stays with his buddies

A very good question. Trump did release a list of judges that he would choose from if nominated to be President. The list was essentially the Heritage foundation's list (six overlap) and while some of them hold controversial views and would be an attempt to be add a sometimes disturbingly conservative element to the court (a re-evaluation of Roe v. Wade for example), they are at least all respected judges.

Now, as to whether Trump would actually abide by that list once in office (especially considering that he has previously voiced support for his sister - a fairly radical left wing judge [and this is further evidence of your point]), I have no ****ing idea.

 

[MrT]

Its failing because the corruption has become more blatant and rampant within government and further government regulation is well beyond out of control. Within my industry regulations and regulatory compliance has become a major headache and cost. Every year I have to deal with some new government hurdle. Its become beyond comical.

Oh come on man.

Surely you recognize that government regulation performs some benefit within your own industry, right? So then just work with the government to voice your opinion on where certain types of headaches can be avoided. The fact that you get a headache or have to pay a small percentage more as a business to deal with certain regulations does not mean that the system is failing. It means that it needs improvement.

And unless you really want to tell me that you're being driven out of business right now or that the regulations aren't serving a single purpose or haven't improved anything within your own industry, then the amount of failure going on is probably pretty minimal.

 

[MrT]

You make it sound like those aren't good enough reasons.

I don't believe that she was claiming that they aren't legitimate reasons. I know that I certainly and explicitly mentioned them as legitimate reasons in my OP.

CPWill, as well as myself, are merely curious to hear the other justifications - to see if there are any "good enough reasons" to support Trump beyond those two she mentioned.

 

[NeverTrump]

This is a post directed towards individuals, and particularly individuals formerly with the #NeverTrump movement, that started off by criticizing Trump and his supporters, but have now migrated to a support, albeit grudging, for Trump.

I am curious whether you realize that one of the primary reasons that you support the man is because of Trump's core group of irrational supporters that supported him long enough for the 16 other candidates to slowly drop out of the race, thereby leaving him as the lone Republican choice.

Seriously, the man joked that he could kill someone in public and his supporters would still support him. Do you place yourself in that camp? No? Well, that means you are supporting someone almost specifically because he DID/DOES have those sorts of supporters and thus, lasted long enough to become the only nominee remaining.

The man has promised to build a wall while making Mexico pay for it, to ban muslims, and to put a 45% tariff on any business that moves overseas. Do you take him completely at his word? No? Well, that means you are supporting someone almost solely because he DID/DOES have supporters that believe those irrational promises and thus, supported him long enough to become the only nominee.

The man denigrated POWs, made fun of a disabled journalist, implied that a journalist asked a tough question because she was on her period, and called Mexicans rapists and drug dealers. Do you support that type of rhetoric? No? Well, that means you are supporting someone almost entirely because he DID/DOES have supporters that support that type of rhetoric and thus, supported him long enough to become the only nominee.

Now, of course - people will rationalize their decisions and sometimes for very rational justifications - a deep hatred for Hillary or particular policies that Democrats support, but I am just curious to hear from these individuals on their thought process to reach their current level of support for Trump.

Sorry I am not voting tomorrow. So I am not a new supporter. Never will be and always said so.

 

[Lutherf]

I agree that such a defensive mechanism provides me some comfort when it comes to the prospect of a Trump Presidency; however, I wonder why you would mention that fact?


Does a Trump supporter [if you don't support him, just pretend that I am asking about the hypothetical supporter] simultaneously hope that the person getting into office will "kick over the whole system" while simultaneously being controlled and put into check by that very same system?

The basic idea was to get rid of the GOP establishment thus opening the door to get some real restraint built into the system. The GOP failed to produce a candidate which fit that bill and actually took an active role in continuing the growth we'd been seeing. Now along comes Trump. For some he was the "E Ticket" candidate. They see him as being a solid business man and straight shooter when he talks. They like that and see promise in that. Heck, maybe he'll turn out to be just that kind of guy.

Personally, I don't see that in Trump. I look at him as a career self-promoter driven, primarily, by whatever makes him more marketable. If I'm right then I sure as hell want the protection of a system which restrains the power of the president. It's kind of worked during this administration and as long as it kind of works during the next administration then it's doing its job.

 

[MrT]

Absolutely not. The primary reasoning, or justification would be that although Trump is a cad, Hillary would be SO MUCH WORSE than that. I hate Trump's manner and rhetoric with the fire of 1,000,000 suns....but if it comes down to who picks the next USSC justices? An raging asshole with limited political ties or raging asshole, dyed-in-the-wool leftist?

Well.....

Now I remember why I didn't pick up on your reason earlier. You started the post with a blanket announcement of how much worse would be Hillary.


But you're right. SC choices are a rational reason to support one candidate over the other.

 

[Chomsky]

four things i find appealing about tRump:

1. the wall. yea, the wall is a stupid idea; ask the chinese. but the purpose of the wall was an issue neither party wanted to address. the donald put it front and center so that it could no longer be ignored. we need to enforce our immigration laws. doing so serves our nation's interest. not doing so serves the corporations' interests; they then have access to an expanded low cost labor pool. if most of or population was highly educated/highly skilled, such importation would not be a significant issue. but 30% of our population cannot earn a high school diploma. and in today's high school, that diploma is given out to anyone who can endure four (to seven) years of showing up. 30% of our people are too stupid to be able to achieve that VERY low standard. that 30% of our population still has expenses that they provide for thru their own employment or from the taxes of others. if that 30% is subjected to a influx of illegals who also have weak skills/education, then the supply of low skilled employees is going to overwhelm the demand for low skilled labor. those who cross the border illegally are highly motivated. they bring with them a strong work ethic. so, now employers can pay low wages to a highly motivated illegal population. the only problem is that those 30% of our population no longer have access to low skill low-wage employment. being without a means to earn an income, their default position is to become recipients of government support programs. in no way am i expressing derision of the illegals. they are doing the honorable thing, finding a means to better the lives of their families; working hard while evading authorities ... all the while at low wages. my derision is reserved for those who refuse to get an education despite having the means to do so, and especially for a government that refuses to enforce immigration laws. but for tRump, this would not be a campaign issue

2. his even middle east position. tRump is willing to give the Palestinians a fair break. while he seeks to maintain our alliance with israel, he indicates he is not willing to sacrifice Palestinian interests to maintain our ongoing relationship with israel. unfortunately, in today's political arena, such reasonableness is a sea-change

3. TPP. tRump realizes the benefactors of the TPP, like NAFTA and the other "free" trade agreements, will be the corporations who are heavily engaged in international trade. those who lose will be everyone else. tRump indicates a willingness to re-negotiate our "free" trade agreements to instead become "fair" trade agreements; something that will not place American jobs at constant disadvantage globally, while our domestic markets are opened, globally

4. can't stand tRump's personality. he's a schmuck. but there is one characteristic that serves him well, and i believe it is the key to his attraction by many. his willingness to stare down those in positions of power. his refusal to play by others' rules, and instead go about his business as he believes serves him best. as an asshole, we see this results in many asshole situations. but there are times when this characteristic allows him to be seen as someone who is not part of the system. a system no one, who is not a part of the system, likes

hope to vote for Bernie
but to avoid tRump's heritage foundation approved list of supreme court nominees, i will hold my nose and cast one ballot for hillary

Hey, this is a pretty good post!

Took some effort, too.

 

[Chomsky]

I gave you one, the only REAL one.

Supreme Court Justices.

Hell, that over-rides anything else, just about.

And that's a pretty dayem good one!

Depending upon which way one would like to see the bench go, of course.

 

[Chomsky]

Considering that I believe Trump could lead the entire United States towards a path of ruin - yes, you could do a whole lot worse than Clinton's selection of 2-3 Supreme Court Justices.

A President can only do so much without Congress' consent.

Hell, he'll probably unite the two party establishments. (yeah, how about that?)

They may even impeach him before it's over!

And let's not forget the Supremes will likely be given the chance to review many of his actions.

I really don't fear much legislatively from a Trump presidency. Our image may take a hit though.

 

[Chomsky]

You know, we are all very blessed to live in this point in time of American history.

This is bigger than Trump or Clinton and their policies, (or in Trump's case, the lack thereof.)

This is a culture vote. The right blamed their losses on not being right-wing enough. We have witnessed rightwing politics sucking up to the popular consensus, mostly of their particular region, and we have watched congress go through a phase of worthlessness we never thought possible. Tea Party voters started the implosion and it has just got worse since, as we watch the GOP shatter in to splinters.

What we have here is a directional mandate. Trump and Clinton are merely the poster children and I couldn't think of two better representatives of the national divide.

Pulling in one direction, you got your Trump culture. They aren't THAT stupid. (Well, not ALL of them.) They know Trump is full of ****. They don't care. He is their "middle finger," they are flying at the nation as gays gets rights, confederate flags get banned or frowned upon, military intervention on sovereign nations is no longer taken as lightly as they would prefer. America is moving "to the left," as some would say, and they are freaking out. They find themselves standing outside the fire on too many issues to count, as society evolves with the times leaving them in the wake. They have bit their tongue for years and finally there is somebody standing on a stump saying that it's okay to hate messkin's and moo-slums and homos. Someone who plays on their bias and prejudice and gives them a sense of validation.

Pulling the other direction are people who prefer to advance freedoms and liberties across the board and put more emphasis on education, healthcare, infra structure, equality, and all that tree-hugger kinda of stuff.

It should be interesting to see how it plays out. :2wave:

This isn't too bad of an assessment!

I think in support of this, is the fact that ultimate tree-hugger candidate is giving quite a run to the establishment candidate of the tree-hugger party!

We live in interesting times!

 

[Chomsky]

Greetings, F & L. :2wave:

I hope you have some sympathy for those of us who, because of unhappy and angry voters in the primaries, find that we're once again faced with the prospect of either not voting at all, or choosing the least disgusting candidate on the ballot in November, and that includes voters in both parties! Hell of a choice! :thumbdown:

I'm telling ya' - sometimes I wish our government was parliamentarian! :doh

 

[Chomsky]

This is not the first time that I have been grateful for the draft which sent me to the country of my birth. You know, you've read my posts on Obama. I never thought there would come a day when I would compare him favorably with anyone. The Best choice is to back Bernie and then just not fund his silly ideas. At least he won't lead to war, which is possible between Hillary's ineptness and Trump's belligerence

Hah!

There's one for posterity!

(even of I did truncate it & it's full context)