The Trump Presidency: Part 21

[pgwenthold]

One reason is that he ran on the oldest, simplest of political promises: "If you vote for me, I will make your life better," and the people who felt left behind and left out by a changing economy believed him. His clueless opponent told those people "You're a basket of deplorables."

If they felt she was saying they were a basket of deplorables, it was because they did not fit in the other basket, of those who felt that they hadn't been served well by previous administrations and were looking to improve themselves.

But I'm sure they would have voted for her if not that for that statement, right?

 

[JoeMorgue]

One reason is that he ran on the oldest, simplest of political promises: "If you vote for me, I will make your life better," and the people who felt left behind and left out by a changing economy believed him. His clueless opponent told those people "You're a basket of deplorables."

Adjust that to "If you vote for me, I will make life worse for the people who you think wronged you."

 

[shuttlt]

To me, Trump's ideology isn't so incredibly extreme that I find it unacceptable. I don't agree with it, but it doesn't make my skin crawl. It's his attitude, his manners, his general embracing of anti-intellectualism. I contrast Donald Trump with Jack Kennedy sometimes. I feel like Donald Trump is "We are entitled to greatness because we are Americans", where Jack Kennedy was more, "We are obligated to be great, because we are Americans."

I don't remember Kennedy, and I'm sure the real Kennedy wasn't as good as the sound bites, but we really need someone like that now.

When the cameras were off, was Kennedy actually a good man though? I hear what you are saying about the way Trump comes across, and I can empathise with your reaction. But plenty of terrible people know how to put on a suit and can make a good speech about hope and change. They do that because it appeals to the prejudices, fears, desires and expectations of their audience. Is the presentation really that important?

 

[shemp]

I agree with a lot of this.



On this point, though, I disagree. Where I grew up at least, racism was pretty common, and a lot more than is acceptable now And sexism and homophobia were just normal. (I was born in 62, graduated high school 40 years ago) I was a liberal, so I occasionally objected when people complained about (insert the N word here), but I wasn't too vocal about it, because that could be kind of dangerous. I think there was a lot more racism then, at least in small town Illinois, but it wasn't a whole lot different when I went of to a University where there were a lot more city and suburban folk, in a lot more cosmopolitan atmosphere.

To me, Trump's ideology isn't so incredibly extreme that I find it unacceptable. I don't agree with it, but it doesn't make my skin crawl. It's his attitude, his manners, his general embracing of anti-intellectualism. I contrast Donald Trump with Jack Kennedy sometimes. I feel like Donald Trump is "We are entitled to greatness because we are Americans", where Jack Kennedy was more, "We are obligated to be great, because we are Americans."

I don't remember Kennedy, and I'm sure the real Kennedy wasn't as good as the sound bites, but we really need someone like that now.

I didn't say that it wasn't common. There are two key differences between that era and today.

In 1980:

1. There were no national media outlets that portrayed it as normal and acceptable.

2. Many people who had those beliefs knew that those beliefs were unacceptable, and they kept it to themselves. Some, of course, did not, but they were generally portrayed in the media as outliers.

In 2020:

1. There are national media outlets that portray it as acceptable, often claiming the false equivalency that it's no different than the beliefs and behavior of liberals. Indeed, many national media outlets claim that these kind of beliefs and behaviors are necessary to "save America."

2. Individuals who harbor these beliefs find their beliefs justified by the large numbers of like-minded individuals on social media. They get the idea that these beliefs are commonplace and acceptable, and that they themselves are not outliers but in fact a majority.

I think it's difficult to make a case that America's standards for decency and morality haven't fallen in the last 40 years. They've collapsed almost completely. People are more openly embracing bad standards.

 

[johnny karate]

Adjust that to "If you vote for me, I will make life worse for the people who you think wronged you."

Exactly.

After seeing the display yesterday from Trump supporters protesting people trying to save their lives, any lingering shred of doubt that I had regarding their motives has evaporated.

Despite the BS they’ve been shoveling for the last decade or more, there is no defining or consistent principle that drives these people. They’ve proven themselves hypocrites at every turn.

These people are driven by fear and hatred, pure and simple.

 

[Bob001]

Adjust that to "If you vote for me, I will make life worse for the people who you think wronged you."

Yeah, there was that too.

 

[shuttlt]

I didn't say that it wasn't common. There are two key differences between that era and today.

In 1980:

1. There were no national media outlets that portrayed it as normal and acceptable.

2. Many people who had those beliefs knew that those beliefs were unacceptable, and they kept it to themselves. Some, of course, did not, but they were generally portrayed in the media as outliers.

In 2020:

1. There are national media outlets that portray it as acceptable, often claiming the false equivalency that it's no different than the beliefs and behavior of liberals. Indeed, many national media outlets claim that these kind of beliefs and behaviors are necessary to "save America."

2. Individuals who harbor these beliefs find their beliefs justified by the large numbers of like-minded individuals on social media. They get the idea that these beliefs are commonplace and acceptable, and that they themselves are not outliers but in fact a majority.

I think it's difficult to make a case that America's standards for decency and morality haven't fallen in the last 40 years. They've collapsed almost completely.

Different country, I know... but in the UK the Black and White minstrel show was airing in the UK until 1978 on the BBC. I struggle to believe that any western country is a more racist place now than it was in 1980.

 

[Bob001]

If they felt she was saying they were a basket of deplorables, it was because they did not fit in the other basket, of those who felt that they hadn't been served well by previous administrations and were looking to improve themselves.

But I'm sure they would have voted for her if not that for that statement, right?

Probably not, but some might have been less motivated to say "I'll show you!" and vote for Trump.

 

[shuttlt]

These people are driven by fear and hatred, pure and simple.

It sounds like you fear and hate them.

 

[The Don]

Different country, I know... but in the UK the Black and White minstrel show was airing in the UK until 1978 on the BBC. I struggle to believe that any western country is a more racist place now than it was in 1980.

It certainly seems much more acceptable to express openly racist opinions than it was back in 1980.

That's not to say that such opinions didn't exist and were merely unexpressed and of course it may be that the issue is that the internet and social media gives a tiny number of racists far better reach than they had back then.

40 years ago it was just a handful of misfits in a pub. Now it's groups of misfits banding together and broadcasting their opinions, which are then picked up by the mainstream press.

Maybe people are indeed less racist, some forms of institutional racism have been directly addressed in the UK, but BAME people still seem to suffer disproportionately from educational, financial, and health inequalities in the UK.

 

[Meadmaker]

When the cameras were off, was Kennedy actually a good man though? I hear what you are saying about the way Trump comes across, and I can empathise with your reaction. But plenty of terrible people know how to put on a suit and can make a good speech about hope and change. They do that because it appeals to the prejudices, fears, desires and expectations of their audience. Is the presentation really that important?

From what I have read of Kennedy, I think he was a good man when the cameras were off. Obviously, I don't know. Famously, he wasn't faithful to his wife, so if that's something that you think matters, that is a flaw, but generally, I don't think he was a bad guy.

Trump is a bad guy, even when the cameras are on. Narcissistic, lying, puts himself above anyone else, and surrounds himself with sycophants, getting rid of anyone who challenges him.

Maybe Kennedy was only good when the cameras were rolling, but I'd settle for that. If you can't even be good when you're on stage, there's no hope that you'll be good when no one is looking.

 

[johnny karate]

It sounds like you fear and hate them.

I hate their ignorance and selfishness and fear that they’re going to get people killed because of it.

 

[shuttlt]

From what I have read of Kennedy, I think he was a good man when the cameras were off. Obviously, I don't know. Famously, he wasn't faithful to his wife, so if that's something that you think matters, that is a flaw, but generally, I don't think he was a bad guy.

I think it goes a little deeper than that "[Kennedy] wasn't faithful to his wife"]. For myself I don't expect psychologically good, normal people to run countries. If one did, they'd be no good at it.

Trump is a bad guy, even when the cameras are on. Narcissistic, lying, puts himself above anyone else, and surrounds himself with sycophants, getting rid of anyone who challenges him.

Is your moral judgement of him as a person the most important thing, or the outcomes in terms on enacted policies and their consequences? The former is certainly very entertaining, but is it actually important?

Maybe Kennedy was only good when the cameras were rolling, but I'd settle for that. If you can't even be good when you're on stage, there's no hope that you'll be good when no one is looking.

You don't think there is a certain kind of honesty in Trumps approach of "saying the quiet part loud"?

 

[shuttlt]

I hate their ignorance and selfishness and fear that they’re going to get people killed because of it.

Everybody has a story for why the hate and fear that motivates them is justified.

 

[johnny karate]

Everybody has a story for why the hate and fear that motivates them is justified.

My story is that idiots are putting all of our lives at risk with their stupid and reckless behavior.

What’s the story for these people you seem to want to defend?

 

[shuttlt]

It certainly seems much more acceptable to express openly racist opinions than it was back in 1980.

I strongly suspect that is due to who you were hanging around with back then. I can remember teachers behaving in ways/saying things that would have them thrown out of the profession today.

That's not to say that such opinions didn't exist and were merely unexpressed and of course it may be that the issue is that the internet and social media gives a tiny number of racists far better reach than they had back then.

This is certainly true.

40 years ago it was just a handful of misfits in a pub. Now it's groups of misfits banding together and broadcasting their opinions, which are then picked up by the mainstream press.

I think this really depends what you mean. If you are talking about people whose worldview is defined by race, and want to be active about it... then I'm sure it was a relatively small group that probably finds it easier to connect now. The background level of everyday racism though seems to me like it was much more common then.

Maybe people are indeed less racist, some forms of institutional racism have been directly addressed in the UK, but BAME people still seem to suffer disproportionately from educational, financial, and health inequalities in the UK.

Maybe? The reason we are talking about institutional racism and micro-aggressions now is because actual racism has massively declined. Imagine what would happen if somebody tried to put the Black and White Minstrels on the BBC today?

 

[JoeMorgue]

It sounds like you fear and hate them.

That just sounds like a new minor variation on someone not understanding the paradox of tolerance.

 

[Meadmaker]

I think it goes a little deeper than that "[Kennedy] wasn't faithful to his wife"]. For myself I don't expect psychologically good, normal people to run countries. If one did, they'd be no good at it.

Well, certainly presidents are not "normal" or "average".

Is your moral judgement of him as a person the most important thing, or the outcomes in terms on enacted policies and their consequences? The former is certainly very entertaining, but is it actually important?

I think the former leads to the latter.

You don't think there is a certain kind of honesty in Trumps approach of "saying the quiet part loud"?

There's a certain transparency on people with no filter, but it isn't honesty with Trump. It's just impulsiveness. He has no regard for the truth. Reality is expected to bend to his will. Trump isn't a phony. What you see is what you get, and I wouldn't say that about every politician or every president. What you see is the real deal with Trump. And it's ugly.

 

[shuttlt]

My story is that idiots are putting all of our lives at risk with their stupid and reckless behavior.

Do you mean the people protesting? I imagine some of them are concerned that rights are being infringed with very little thought, and in some cases to very little purpose. Wasn't there a state that was banning drive through Easter services, I think at the same time as drive through liquor stores were still allowed? It's not like there aren't lots of examples of official overreach if its the sort of thing one is interested in. In the UK police were threatening to search peoples shopping baskets in case they bought something non-essential with their essential purchases.

 

[Meadmaker]

Maybe? The reason we are talking about institutional racism and micro-aggressions now is because actual racism has massively declined. Imagine what would happen if somebody tried to put the Black and White Minstrels on the BBC today?

Have you ever noticed that you never see "Holiday Inn" at Christmas anymore? (In case there are youngster's in the audience, "Holiday Inn" is the movie where the song "White Christmas" appeared, sung by Bing Crosby.

I wondered about that. I figured it was just an old fashioned movie, gone out of style, but there were other oldies that appeared at Christmas. Then I remembered, there's a blackface scene in it. It wouldn't be acceptable today.

In general, I absolutely agree that there was a lot more racism then. I'm puzzled that anyone could think any differently. I can remember "****** lover" being used as an insult, among people who were pretty much normal folks. Today, it's censored (as you can no doubt see in the asterisks in the previous sentence.)

Remember Archie Bunker? He was portrayed as old fashioned and dimwitted, but he was not portrayed as a bad person, because he was pretty normal. He was portrayed as a good man who was mired in a time of ignorance, but he was not portrayed as a bad man.