US Politics

Tell me about it. How can you really counter that? His argument ultimately ends up back at "MSM have it in for him".

I even gave a personal anecdote, from someone I know wouldn't lie, who worked at a bank during at time when they had Trump on a retainer to help recover funds they'd lent him, which he hid off-shore, defaulted on, and then filed for bankruptcy. Apparently he micromanaged his money flows so it was cheaper to pay him to help them find their money than it was to go to court and trace it. This was a long time ago now before the apprentice.

This is it. A big, very uncomfortable step towards an anti-racist society is coming to terms with the fact that nearly 100% (if not all - there I go with my discomfort) of white people are racist. It's an unavoidable notion given how and where we have grown up. I include myself in that statement.

I am not a Twitter enthusiast, but this Kenyan journalist is good.

#BREAKING Emergency meeting of AU foreign ministers urges Americans to remain calm as vote counting continues in the troubled nation's chaotic presidential election, says ethnic violence threatens the reputation of a country regarded as one of the most promising in the Americas.

https://threadreaderapp.com/thread/1322999903753220099.html?fbclid=IwAR0MfoJvAgiTXNiCW2wme9mHUgqe1pkZqcZypRnl7cUNSJPhPnYGTaS1oLQ

accumulation of extreme wealth

Donald Trump hasn't accumulated wealth. He was gifted it by his father and his performance has been "mediocre compared with the stock market and property in New York".

Donald Trump hasn't accumulated wealth

Yeah - so in his case he's also incompetent :)

Accumulation, ownership, proximity to, familiarity with - they're all likely symptoms of character flaws.

The weird thing about this whole 'Stolen election' thing is that it eminates from and revolves entirely around Trump's mental and emotional inability to believe he can lose. He will go to his grave believing he was robbed, because ha can't accept otherwise and he's spent his life believing his failures are really successes and presumably anyone who told him otherwise was fired. But somewhere in his madness, he's managed to draw in a load of senior republicans and millions of voters too. It's insane.

I don’t know what to say to that, but from a black point of view that’s unacceptable.
You can allow it the first time round, no one really knew what kind of president he would be, you could guess but no one knew, but the second time knowing how he governs (or doesn’t) and the amount of conflict and chaos he creates.
The mind boggles.

Obviously their lesser of two evils is diametrically opposed to

Likewise, it was only as I typed it out I thought, ‘hmm maybe this is bollocks’.

I'm still trying to get my head around why Trump is so popular?

• Obnoxious/confident/straight-forward?
  
• Populism (gives his base what they want)?
  
• Signals a 'better' yesterday?
  
• Anti-globalism: 'America-first'?
  
• Objectively racist?
  
• Anti-government/state (corrupt elites)?
  
• Anti-abortion religion pleasing stance?
  
• Reduced taxes for practically everyone?
  
  
  

I'd love to see the ranking of reasons for why people voted for him...

I'm still trying to get my head around why Trump is so popular?

In some ways he's popular because the abiding image so many people have of him was formed watching the apprentice where he is displayed as the consumate billionaire businessman, you can't fool him, takes no shit, "if he can do that in business he can do it for our great country"... etc.

The other side is the ludicrous partizan nature of US politics, which covers most of the points you raise. And the racists love him too.

Charisma and energy.

Not to get all MSM is biased, but we rarely see his side of him. But yet when you hear foreign correspondents who've been at his events and in rooms when he's been schmoozing they'll comment on it.

The guy made most of his money in entertainment. He knows how to perform and make you feel good. When all you see is a odious fat cunt, it's easy to miss this side of him.

due to lack of exposure to any alternative viewpoints/opinions

I'd say it's not due to lack of expose to alternative viewpoints, it's more the rejection or denial of.

If someone is already on the bones of their arse, they probably don't have much compassion to begin with. Threaten to take away their bones, then it's very easy to get them to stick their fingers further into their ears

I can see what you're getting at but I just want to challenge this assumption

https://www.thirdsector.co.uk/poorest-people-give-highest-proportion-income-charity-says-study/fundraising/article/1176810

Trump gets blocks of votes from single issue voters;
Gun owners: The NRA continues to promote the right of anyone to own an assault rifle.
Anti-abortionists: this is just not white Catholics, but many Latinx and evangelical (supposed) Christians.
Anti-communists: Any form of Socialism is anathema to them, except corporate subsidies to farmers and fossil fuel producers.

I put that very clumsily, lack of compassion in any form is not what I meant. I'm sure people with lower socio-economic standing do certainly show compassion and empathy in a number of ways (charity, community etc). But look at what we saw here. It was very easy for the Leave campaign to convince large swathes of people that it their circumstances were the fault of immigrants and refugees under the banner of "the EU".

I agree. But I don't think the people we're referring to are scared about the money in their pocket. It's the wider idea of loss of freedom, safety and prosperity.

except corporate subsidies to farmers and fossil fuel producers.

This is something that fucking baffles me.

Why is providing a social safety-net communism, but spunking money on handouts for private companies when they aren't competitive in a free market is economic conservativism?

Yeah totally, playing on people's fears is always the easiest option. The foreign bogeyman is an easy target and it seems to work.

I'm not an immigrant (despite my efforts to move to Spain a few years ago), so I can't speak for that mind set but I find it surprising the amount of people who seem willing to pull up the bridge after them.

I've always thought a large part of the appeal (in 2016) was Trump not being a politician, and "shaking up the system".

People feel removed from politics, because they cannot identify with the people that are standing there asking you to vote for them.
When a popular figure from a TV show appears and starts spouting off about things you "care" about (bloody forrins taking all our jobs, etc) it gets people who normally don't vote, out of their arm chairs and into the polling booths
(this reads the same for leaving the EU vote...)

Inexplicable now though, its almost like people got caught up in the hype and voted in Trump in 2016, then paid zero attention for 4 years and then voted for him again because they didn't notice/ care he was a useless Wotsit.

There is a Green argument for subsidising small scale farmers to avoid depopulation, as long as the level of subsidy is tied into stewardship of the land, rivers, air and wildlife.
No excuse for subsidising US style feedlots.

I guess those with the assets and capital can influence law makers.
See the Koch brothers for more details.

Cornelius: Obama did have control of the Senate, and the House.
https://www.npr.org/2016/03/04/469052020/the-democratic-party-got-crushed-during-the-obama-presidency-heres-why
The Democrats also lost more state positions than ever before during his two terms. I'd recommend Jane Mayer's Dark Money, if you haven't read it, as a starting guide to how that happened and also to anyone who thinks there is a 'moderate' Republican party left in existence that might emerge to repudiate Trumpism.

b - Republican - Someone else as president

I think b would've gotten a fair chunk of votes

Wasn't b Kanye this time around?

Why is providing a social safety-net communism, but spunking money on handouts for private companies when they aren't competitive in a free market is economic conservativism?

I think it comes from a mindset that corporations create jobs, rather than seeing jobs as emerging from a healthy, broad-based economy that creates demand for goods and services (and corporations actually spending the lowest possible amount on salaries to keep making money).

From that starting point, if you don't keep corporations afloat then "there won't be jobs for people to go back to".

Trump dropped from the thread title? He's really toast now isn't he.