Passing Peak Trump?

dudalb said:
Sorry, but that this is going to blow over quickly is just plain wrong.
Click to expand...

acbytesla said:
You mean that whopping 35 percent approval rating?

Sorry Don. Not even close. The public House hearing will go on for at least the next 2 months. Then we get the Senate Trial.
Click to expand...

I hope you're both right but so far every scandal which would have sealed the fate of any other President has had no long term impact on his approval numbers.

During the Mueller investigation, each new revelation would dent his popularity briefly but then it would return to 40% which is where it's always been and which, combined with decent economic news and effective voter suppression may very well be enough to secure his reelection.

The GOP is adopting the same stance they did with the Mueller investigation, that it's a partisan hack-job carried out by political insiders, that it's being done in secret (and is thus suspect) and that the process and all evidence relating to it is illegitimate. That may be a load of hogwash but it's enough to keep the 40% on board.

If there was any doubt about this, look at the impeachment vote in the House. The GOP line is holding firm whereas there were tiny cracks in the Democrats'.

40% of the US electorate are firmly on board, are swallowing the GOP propaganda and/or are sufficiently disinterested for the impeachment process not to change their voting intention.

All of the above just IMO of course.
 
The Don said:
I hope you're both right but so far every scandal which would have sealed the fate of any other President has had no long term impact on his approval numbers.

During the Mueller investigation, each new revelation would dent his popularity briefly but then it would return to 40% which is where it's always been and which, combined with decent economic news and effective voter suppression may very well be enough to secure his reelection.

The GOP is adopting the same stance they did with the Mueller investigation, that it's a partisan hack-job carried out by political insiders, that it's being done in secret (and is thus suspect) and that the process and all evidence relating to it is illegitimate. That may be a load of hogwash but it's enough to keep the 40% on board.

If there was any doubt about this, look at the impeachment vote in the House. The GOP line is holding firm whereas there were tiny cracks in the Democrats'.

40% of the US electorate are firmly on board, are swallowing the GOP propaganda and/or are sufficiently disinterested for the impeachment process not to change their voting intention.

All of the above just IMO of course.
Click to expand...

I don't think this has anything to do with Trump or even the various lines of defense that the GOP is putting up. Rather, it has to do with the Trump base being so entrenched in their position that nothing can get them out. The Trump personality cult is built on the ego of every single Trumpist.

Because of this, it's entirely rational to blame individual Trump voters for the evils of the Trump admin.
 
uke2se said:
I don't think this has anything to do with Trump or even the various lines of defense that the GOP is putting up. Rather, it has to do with the Trump base being so entrenched in their position that nothing can get them out. The Trump personality cult is built on the ego of every single Trumpist.

Because of this, it's entirely rational to blame individual Trump voters for the evils of the Trump admin.
Click to expand...
Part of the deep divide is due to how the media has changed. We aren't exposed to both sides of the story as much as we used to be when there were fewer outlets that had to speak to all kinds of viewers and readers. This is, in my opinion, especially true for conservatives, who get their news from Fox.

I've been trying to read some conservative opinions but I can rarely get through an article by a conservative like Hugh Hewitt or, worse, Marc Thiessen. Reason.com either. The only conservatives whose arguments make sense to me are luke warm on Trump at best. If you're feeding yourself a steady diet of Fox, your opinion is bound to tend towards the view that Trump's critics are making mountains out of molehills.

Such folk are not evil. They've failed to get the other side of the story, but so have I often. Once an opinion is entrenched, it's painful to read an article on the other side. I tend to think that's because the other side presents terrible arguments, but I would think that, wouldn't I?

I don't buy that my Trump supportng friends are evil. I think they're terribly wrong.
 
phiwum said:
Such folk are not evil. They've failed to get the other side of the story, but so have I often. Once an opinion is entrenched, it's painful to read an article on the other side. I tend to think that's because the other side presents terrible arguments, but I would think that, wouldn't I?

I don't buy that my Trump supportng friends are evil. I think they're terribly wrong.
Click to expand...

I'm Canadian, but I follow US politics. I think my inner liberal cannot help but recoil over what happens south of the border. My dislike for Trump is boundless. I believe him to be a terrible human being and a global threat. I find myself becoming so tribal and I don't even live in the US. This current situation brings to light traits in myself that I am not happy to see. I have become so prejudicial to other people. If someone does or says something stupid or right leaning, in my head I say "I bet you're a Trump supporter", or in my case, "I bet if we lived in the US, you would be a Trump supporter". And then I instantly dislike that person. Sometimes it's something petty, like a person with a distasteful bumper sticker like "Hung Like a Horse", or those stupid bull testicles hanging from their trailer hitch, and I think what an idiot--probably likes Trump.

In some cases, those are probably fairly accurate markers. But I maybe need to get better at seeing both sides. Not in the sense of moving my position on things. My liberal pillars are firmly entrenched. I'll never budge on things like a womans right to choose, or keeping religion out of state and school or equal rights for all, etc. But I could be better, at least, at trying to understand how the other side feels. As in people who support Trump. There is so much prejudice going around and I hate that I find myself participating in it. Not everything we do is defined by our politics or by the politicians we choose to support. How tested would my convictions be if I found myself supporting a liberal politician who was of questionable character but constantly fought for the things that I believe in? I don't know, I've never really found myself in that situation. I like to think that I would stand on principle, but that is easy to say when it has never been tested.

A silly recent example that occurred to me this morning in the Tim Hortons drive through line. There was a recent article in The Star titled "I hate Tim Hortons more than I hate Donald Trump". Basically the article talked down about those of us that like mediocre coffee. It came off (to me at least) very offensively. While waiting in line this morning, I remembered that article where the author thinks most people who like Tim Hortons probably also like Trump. Much like I equate things I find to be stupid or tasteless with Trump supporters. In my case, that author could not be further from the truth. But being lumped in like that did not feel good, and gave me pause.

The current political climate is so toxic and is bringing out such stark and tribal divisions that we see people defending the indefensible or find ourselves suddenly thinking in mean and base ways the we might not have done five years ago.

I don't like it.

The Star article:

https://www.thestar.com/entertainme...im-hortons-more-than-i-hate-donald-trump.html
 
Last edited:
dmaker said:
I'm Canadian, but I follow US politics. I think my inner liberal cannot help but recoil over what happens south of the border. My dislike for Trump is boundless. I believe him to be a terrible human being and a global threat. I find myself becoming so tribal and I don't even live in the US. This current situation brings to light traits in myself that I am not happy to see. I have become so prejudicial to other people. If someone does or says something stupid or right leaning, in my head I say "I bet you're a Trump supporter", or in my case, "I bet if we lived in the US, you would be a Trump supporter". And then I instantly dislike that person. Sometimes it's something petty, like a person with a distasteful bumper sticker like "Hung Like a Horse", or those stupid bull testicles hanging from their trailer hitch, and I think what an idiot--probably likes Trump.

In some cases, those are probably fairly accurate markers. But I maybe need to get better at seeing both sides. Not in the sense of moving my position on things. My liberal pillars are firmly entrenched. I'll never budge on things like a womans right to choose, or keeping religion out of state and school or equal rights for all, etc. But I could be better, at least, at trying to understand how the other side feels. As in people who support Trump. There is so much prejudice going around and I hate that I find myself participating in it. Not everything we do is defined by our politics or by the politicians we choose to support. How tested would my convictions be if I found myself supporting a liberal politician who was of questionable character but constantly fought for the things that I believe in? I don't know, I've never really found myself in that situation. I like to think that I would stand on principle, but that is easy to say when it has never been tested.

A silly recent example that occurred to me this morning in the Tim Hortons drive through line. There was a recent article in The Star titled "I hate Tim Hortons more than I hate Donald Trump". Basically the article talked down about those of us that like mediocre coffee. It came off (to me at least) very offensively. While waiting in line this morning, I remembered that article where the author thinks most people who like Tim Hortons probably also like Trump. Much like I equate things I find to be stupid or tasteless with Trump supporters. In my case, that author could not be further from the truth. But being lumped in like that did not feel good, and gave me pause.

The current political climate is so toxic and is bringing out such stark and tribal divisions that we see people defending the indefensible or find ourselves suddenly thinking in mean and base ways the we might not have done five years ago.

I don't like it.

The Star article:

https://www.thestar.com/entertainme...im-hortons-more-than-i-hate-donald-trump.html
Click to expand...

I think you and I are on the same page. I think that anyone who likes Trump is terribly ignorant or biased, that they've let their egos, self-interest and desire to belong to a victimized class fighting back blind them to the horrible abuses and incompetence of the administration.

But very few of them would think of themselves as racist. A larger percentage hold genuinely negative racial stereotypes but think these biases are supported by the evidence and not that they are literally racist. After all, some of my best friends... And, I don't think they're literally evil for these racist views. I'd like to find a way to bring them to a better position, not punish them for enabling a scoundrel like Trump to remain in office.

The same goes for less egregious views. While we wonder what they would've said if Obama had done similar things, they wonder how we can't see that we are the hypocrites, that we excuse Obama for things that are just the same as what Trump is doing. Now, I don't think they have a real point there because the actual examples given aren't even close to comparable[1], but this is just reasoning gone horribly awry, not anything like evil. A strong desire to reinforce one's own views can lead to spurious arguments and we are all prone to this to a greater or lesser degree. The effect is much greater when we are surrounded by like-minded folk and exposed uniformly to similar views in the media.

We're not going to make things better by turning our opponents into legitimate victims, showering them with scorn and calling them evil. I'm not saying that we shouldn't hold them responsible for Trump but recognize that their support is due to a lot of unfortunate factors that indicate grave intellectual failings and some moral failings too, but not evil incarnate. Surely this view shouldn't be controversial. To the extent it is, I fear that another echo chamber is exerting its effect.

Note: I'm a hell of a lot less forgiving to Republican politicians who enable Trump's malfeasance and incompetence and pretend that this is normal and the other side is nuts.

[1] In a conversation with a Trump-supporting buddy, I asked him what he thinks of Trump selecting Doral for the G7. He asked why it was okay that Obama pushed Chicago for the Olympics site. It was a pitiful attempt at saying the Democrats are just as bad and I know this guy. He's clever enough to know better than to make this argument if only he wasn't surrounded by folks in rural Oklahoma who will reply "Good point!"
 
Last edited:
phiwum said:
Part of the deep divide is due to how the media has changed. We aren't exposed to both sides of the story as much as we used to be when there were fewer outlets that had to speak to all kinds of viewers and readers. This is, in my opinion, especially true for conservatives, who get their news from Fox.

....
Click to expand...
Anybody that wants well-balanced news can find it quite easily. It is the consumer that determines which news source they reference. I do not believe that any single news organization can be entirely credited with a monopoly on any particular political ideology.

There were around 150 million votes cast in the 2016 Federal election.

Average Fox viewership is 3 million. Fox news Prime Time viewers account for less than 1% of population. Source.

The vast vast majority of individuals who voted for Trump did not watch Fox News.
 
ServiceSoon said:
Anybody that wants well-balanced news can find it quite easily. It is the consumer that determines which news source they reference. I do not believe that any single news organization can be entirely credited with a monopoly on any particular political ideology.

There were around 150 million votes cast in the 2016 Federal election.

Average Fox viewership is 3 million. Fox news Prime Time viewers account for less than 1% of population. Source.

The vast vast majority of individuals who voted for Trump did not watch Fox News.
Click to expand...

I don't know that your data supports your conclusion. The question is whether Fox was the major news source for most Trump voters. That question cannot be answered by looking only at viewership at any one time, since one may rarely watch Fox and yet Fox is still the major news source for that person.

I agree that one can become well-informed if he wants to. It's a lot more comfortable to watch sources that largely agree with your prior opinion and it's a lot easier to do so these days than in the days of Watergate.

I watch PBS and listen to NPR as my primary sources, along with WAPO, the Times and occasionally the Wall Street Journal. I think it's fair to say that my sources tend a bit to the left, but by and large I think PBS and NPR aim for fairness. (Amna Nawaz drives me nuts when she interviews anyone on the right, however. I wish PBS would rein her in.)
 
ServiceSoon said:
Anybody that wants well-balanced news can find it quite easily. It is the consumer that determines which news source they reference. I do not believe that any single news organization can be entirely credited with a monopoly on any particular political ideology.

There were around 150 million votes cast in the 2016 Federal election.

Average Fox viewership is 3 million. Fox news Prime Time viewers account for less than 1% of population. Source.

The vast vast majority of individuals who voted for Trump did not watch Fox News.
Click to expand...

I'd guess the vast majority of individuals who voted for Trump are simply life-long Republicans.
 
phiwum said:
Note: I'm a hell of a lot less forgiving to Republican politicians who enable Trump's malfeasance and incompetence and pretend that this is normal and the other side is nuts.

[1] In a conversation with a Trump-supporting buddy, I asked him what he thinks of Trump selecting Doral for the G7. He asked why it was okay that Obama pushed Chicago for the Olympics site. It was a pitiful attempt at saying the Democrats are just as bad and I know this guy. He's clever enough to know better than to make this argument if only he wasn't surrounded by folks in rural Oklahoma who will reply "Good point!"
Click to expand...

Obama owns Chicago? :jaw-dropp
 
Susheel said:
Obama owns Chicago? :jaw-dropp
Click to expand...

Or working to benefit your adopted home town is just like forcing other nations to prop up your struggling resort in the off-season. What's the difference after all?
 
A question that's been nagging me: How many genuine hard-shell, total immersion Trumpists are there? Is there any way to assess their actual numbers? Anecdotes won't cut it; we've all seen those interviews with various Alfred and Alfrieda Newmans, and been queasily amused at their dead brains. But that's just some tv presenter's selection. How large a poll would it take to collect enough data for a sound estimate?

And I think that the poll questions would have to include, "Will you support Trump NO MATTER WHAT?"

Yes, as blunt as that, so as not to challenge their dead brains.
 
dudalb said:
Today was not a good day for Donnie at all.
Click to expand...

"For me, it was Tuesday."

- M Bison, probably

---

I'm pretty sure the only people who seriously think this was a bad day for Trump are the people who find a reason to think every day is a bad day for Trump.

Whether Trump has actually shifted public opinion more against him than before, in any significant or lasting way, remains to be seen. Do you have evidence?
 
You must log in or register to reply here.

Back
Top Bottom