Quote:
Originally Posted by GirlySports
Both parties have lost ther way. The "government is broken argument". A rebel won the Republican primary. Another rebel nearly won the Democratic primary against someone who was practically acclaimed.
If the rebel becomes president everything changes. maybe we get new political parties or new rules.
|
This is a narrative I honestly don't get. I see how Sanders is a "rebel." But how is Trump a rebel? He's a former billionaire who squandered most of his inheritance on foolish real estate investments, who runs on a policy of "I'll make the bad stuff better, just you wait. It's going to be beautiful."
He has not presented one single key idea that I'm aware of. He stands for nothing, has no ideas and is utterly empty of any vision.
Now his supporters may want a rebellion, that I can agree with. But they are being duped by a charlatan who has managed to get deep into this election process without providing a single reliable clue as to what sort of leader he intends to be.
It's as if some people just woke up one morning and said "yeah, that windsock person outside the car dealership is getting my vote. I mean, he flops around a lot, but man he sure tells it like it is."
I don't think "rebel" describes Trump at all. "Pathological liar"? Sure. "Sociopath"? Quite possibly. But "rebel" implies that he is in some way ideological, or devoted to some kind of cause. There is no "cause" here--there is just a thin-skinned narcissist spewing feeble nativist nonsense while pitifully hoping that the cult of personality he has somehow erected around himself doesn't come crashing down around him like every other business venture that he has touched.