The New American Politics thread

[driveway]

Complete transcript of Trump's sit-down with Washington Posts' Editorial Board. Also, audio available. This guy is ... just the worst.

https://www.washingtonpost.com/blogs...itorial-board/

[Senator Clay Davis]

Ahh just what we needed in this #### show, Trump's campaign manager has had an arrest warrant issued for him for allegedly assaulting the Breitbart reporter a few weeks back.

[Iowa_Flames_Fan]

Originally Posted by driveway

Complete transcript of Trump's sit-down with Washington Posts' Editorial Board. Also, audio available. This guy is ... just the worst.

https://www.washingtonpost.com/blogs...itorial-board/

Reading transcripts of Trump is so bizarre. He really just talks and talks without ever getting to a point. Even when the question is simple.

Some particularly weird examples:

1. On the question of promoting democratic values:

" I just think that we have values in our country that we have to promote. We have a country that is in bad shape, it’s in bad condition. You look at our inner cities, our inner cities are a horrible mess. I watched Baltimore, I have many, many friends in Baltimore, we watched what happened."

2. On what he would do for Baltimore (you know, since he brought it up):

"Well, number one, I’d create economic zones. I’d create incentives for companies to move in. I’d work on spirit because the spirit is so low, it’s incredible, the unemployment, you look at unemployment for black youth in this country, African American youth, is 58-59 percent. It’s unthinkable. Unemployment for African Americans – not youth, but African Americans – is very high. And I would create in the inner cities, which is what I really do best, that’s why when I open a building and I show you it’s way ahead of schedule, under budget and everything else—I think it was the Rite Aid store, the store in Baltimore it took them 20 years to get it built, one store, and then it burned down in one night—we have to create incentives for people to love what they are doing, and to make money. "

3. On whether he thinks part of the issue in inner cities is the way black people are treated by law enforcement:

"Well I’ve never really see anything that – you know, I feel very strongly about law enforcement. And, you know, if you look at the riot that took place over the summer, if that were stopped – it all, it mostly took place on the first evening, and if that were stopped on the first evening, you know, you’d have a much nicer city right now, because much of that damage and much of the destruction was done on Evening One."

Seriously, that is some bizarre and meaningless word salad. It's as though he doesn't actually understand any question, but just gloms on to whatever word he recognizes and then riffs on it with some bizarre species of surrealist poetry. Like if you ask for his approach to fiscal policy and the budget, you'll get:

"I once rented a car from Budget. Great company. And that is how we see American values, business values. We have to promote these. And I have a lot of friends who rent cars, and they tell me that we need to revitalize business, and find ways to create incentives for people. I have the best plan, the best incentives..... (and so on and on ad nauseam)"

[peter12]

One very astute National Review commentator noted that while Trump may be full of hot air, it appears that Trumpism is very much the real thing.

[HockeyIlliterate]

Originally Posted by Senator Clay Davis

Problem is he still hasn't shown that he's changed anything with demographics . . .

Not sure that I agree.

Bernie is bringing in the young voters--namely, those who aren't known for being particularly involved in politics beyond clicking a "like" button.

Would they vote for Hillary? Doubtful.

Originally Posted by Senator Clay Davis

Ultimately the problem is he never changed the equation to winning, if anything her advantage among minorities and women has increased.

Which is irrelevant, because unlike the voters that Bernie is bringing out, the minorities and women who are currently voting for Hillary would--by all accounts--also vote for Bernie if he were the sole Democratic candidate.

So, in reality, Bernie is changing the equation to winning by bringing out the youth vote and, arguably, others who typically would not vote for the Democratic party.

Hillary, on the other hand, hasn't changed the equation at all, as she hasn't widened the Democratic voter base nor broadened the Party's appeal. Instead, she's simply relying on the historic Democratic base--but she isn't increasing it in any way.

Originally Posted by Senator Clay Davis

Bernie has virtually no good claim to the superdelegates other than "I deserve to win" . . . .

Are you forgetting that this same claim is essentially all that Hillary has made as well?

The DNC has rigged the game so that Hillary will be the nominee. The whole charade was preordained from the outset. All because Hillary believes--and has convinced others that---she deserves to win.

[Fuzz]

I wonder if he can keep this going until a general election, or at some point will step over a line or just implode.

[Senator Clay Davis]

Originally Posted by HockeyIlliterate

Not sure that I agree.

Bernie is bringing in the young voters--namely, those who aren't known for being particularly involved in politics beyond clicking a "like" button.

Would they vote for Hillary? Doubtful.

What don't you agree with? Coming into this election, Bernie's major issue was getting minority votes. To date he's consistently gotten killed by the minority vote, a voting block she dominates (along with women too for that matter). He's still primarily riding on the backs of mostly white, mostly young voters. He hasn't expanded much past that, hence why he has little chance to win. And those voters never vote to begin with, so while they are nice, they are hardly necessary (as they were not necessary in 2008 or 2012).

Which is irrelevant, because unlike the voters that Bernie is bringing out, the minorities and women who are currently voting for Hillary would--by all accounts--also vote for Bernie if he were the sole Democratic candidate.

So, in reality, Bernie is changing the equation to winning by bringing out the youth vote and, arguably, others who typically would not vote for the Democratic party.

Hillary, on the other hand, hasn't changed the equation at all, as she hasn't widened the Democratic voter base nor broadened the Party's appeal. Instead, she's simply relying on the historic Democratic base--but she isn't increasing it in any way.

Too bad this is the Democratic nominee for President and not the independent nominee for President. He loses all the Democratic demos pretty soundly. He's tried to use the Democratic Party to be the nominee, while not actually appealing to most of the base of that party. Shockingly he's done poorly with that approach. Say what you will about Trump, but he stole the GOP base and that's why he's winning. Bernie can't connect with the base, that's why he's losing.

Bernie is bringing out independents who generally don't vote at all. So really if they don't vote in 2016 it'll be....just like 2012, 2008 etc...More votes are nice, but they aren't necessary to win at all. The Dems dominated the last two elections without a surge of new independents. They're nice, but not necessary. Now if those people want to turn around and vote for Trump, why would you ever want the support of people who will turn to a Trump if one thing doesn't go their way? Sounds like anarchists to me, not progressives or liberals. Most of Bernie's support from progressives and liberals will reluctantly fall in line, since the alternatives have stated their goal is to crush progressives.

Are you forgetting that this same claim is essentially all that Hillary has made as well?

The DNC has rigged the game so that Hillary will be the nominee. The whole charade was preordained from the outset. All because Hillary believes--and has convinced others that---she deserves to win.

Wow, so they've rigged a 2.5 million vote advantage to her? Very impressive. This is actually by far the biggest disappointment in some Bernie supporters, they've essentially become right wingers with conspiracy theories and other nonsense. Hillary appeals the the Democratic base way more than Bernie, that's why she's winning. She's virtually guaranteed to go into a convention with more total votes, and more total delegates. If Hillary were trying to poach the supers with that scenario reversed (Bernie ahead in votes/delegate), I'm guessing Bernie supporters would probably threaten to riot. But when it's Hillary, must be a conspiracy.

[puckedoff]

Originally Posted by HockeyIlliterate

... The DNC has rigged the game so that Hillary will be the nominee. The whole charade was preordained from the outset. All because Hillary believes--and has convinced others that---she deserves to win.

How preposterous, convincing other people that you deserve their vote! And in an election no less! You're right, clearly something awful (possibly even democratic!) is afoot!

[Iowa_Flames_Fan]

Originally Posted by peter12

One very astute National Review commentator noted that while Trump may be full of hot air, it appears that Trumpism is very much the real thing.

OK, but serious question: what IS Trumpism? I mean, besides the very real and yet substantively shallow rage among the GOP base against their own party?

I honestly can't think of a single thing he stands for. Well--OK, there was that ludicrous wall thing, and then the muslim registration program, and stopping all muslims from coming into the country. So basically, every concrete policy proposal he has ever spewed out has been a total disaster that even his most ardent supporters don't actually believe can or should be done.

But beyond that very shallow veneer is a pile of incomprehensible linguistic mulligatawny stew. What are his policies? Well, he has the BEST policies. What is his approach to fiscal management or the budget? He's going to make those things great, because he has the best experience, and his budget will be the best. Foreign policy? He'll have the BEST foreign policy, because he will be "strong" instead of "weak." And you should believe him because he built a building this one time, and he's "negotiated with China."

In Reykjavik, Iceland, there was a party once that went by the name (roughly translated) of "The Best Party." Their platform was: to bring back all of the good things, and stop doing the bad things. They proposed a plan to make the city great again, and "improve" the zoo by bringing in a polar bear, because polar bears are awesome, and free towels at the swimming pools, because swimming rocks.

Their policy was essentially the same as Trump's--it turned on this absurd notion that only you stand for the BEST ideas, and your opponent (implicitly) has the WORST ideas.

The difference? The "Best Party" was a joke, and Trump, shockingly, appears to be serious. At the end of the day though he has failed to propose a single idea for what he would actually DO as President, other than one or two totally impractical and probably illegal ideas that seem to have occurred to him in the middle of an answer to a different question.

So "Trumpism" may well be real in the sense that it is a REAL force that is REALLY destroying American conservatism and the GOP from the inside right now.

But it isn't, as far as I can tell, "real" in the sense of offering anything like a reformative vision for America itself. Trumpism is not "Reaganomics." It's just alphabet soup with a hairpiece that for some reason has duped a great number of voters into thinking a billionaire hotelier and fulsome bag of wind actually has their back in some way. It is truly.. bizarre.

[peter12]

I think the movement coalescing behind Trump stands against the idea that people within a society are just individuals who are measured by their productivity, and that there is an egalitarian notion to citizenship or that there is nothing intrinsically wrong with the people at the bottom half of the spectrum.

[Iowa_Flames_Fan]

Originally Posted by peter12

I think the movement coalescing behind Trump stands against the idea that people within a society are just individuals who are measured by their productivity, and that there is an egalitarian notion to citizenship or that there is nothing intrinsically wrong with the people at the bottom half of the spectrum.

So... Marxism, then, in its purest form?

[peter12]

Originally Posted by Iowa_Flames_Fan

So... Marxism, then, in its purest form?

Well, the new libertarian economics has a lot in common with Marxism. Egalitarianism through citizenship is not a Marxist idea, but the essence of liberalism.

[Parallex]

Originally Posted by Iowa_Flames_Fan

OK, but serious question: what IS Trumpism?

Near as I can tell it's populist nationalism based on Caucasian racial and economic anxiety.

[Senator Clay Davis]

You do kinda feel this is pure trolling. Or maybe it's how you "Make America Great Again"

Ben JacobsVerified account
‏@Bencjacobs
Katrina Pierson says Corey Lewandowski will stay on the campaign even if he is convicted

https://twitter.com/Bencjacobs/statu...63293475717121

[Iowa_Flames_Fan]

Originally Posted by peter12

Well, the new libertarian economics has a lot in common with Marxism. Egalitarianism through citizenship is not a Marxist idea, but the essence of liberalism.

The notion of the individual as separate from their measurable and fungible "product" is, in my view, THE idea behind Marxism. Marx and Engels just referred to that as product and its utilitarian value as "capital."

I think we are partly on the same page in terms of the "populist" roots of Trumpism, although I don't agree that there is any real substance behind Trump himself. Is he the mouthpiece of something larger, some populist ethos that he has (likely by accident) tapped into? Maybe, I suppose...

But I really think Trumpism is just the manifestation of white working-class rage, fuelled by a persistent and regional economic depression in some areas where the seeds for that rhetoric were already in place. These are voters who formed key parts of the GOP base, but who feel that the persistent trickle-down policies espoused by Romney and his ilk have really left them and their real interests behind. Ironically, even though they worship the idea of Reagan, they are actually rejecting Reaganomics, which saw its final manifestation in Romney's infamous "49%" tax plan in 2012.

This is why Trump does well in areas like Appalachia, or rural Pennsylvania, but poorly in urban centers, among college-educated voters, and among non-white voters. To the extent those demographics share these frustrations (and some do) they have already chosen to express their rage through the democratic party, not the GOP.

[RougeUnderoos]

The "sensible" one, Kasich, on this story about Trump's campaign manager grabbing that reporter's arm:

"I don't know this guy, I don't know exactly what happened, my understanding is that he grabbed somebody, and that's frankly totally and completely inappropriate. It could have been one of my daughters for that matter"

It truly is a race to the bottom. These guys are so full of ####. How does anyone take anything they say seriously?

[Iowa_Flames_Fan]

Originally Posted by RougeUnderoos

The "sensible" one, Kasich, on this story about Trump's campaign manager grabbing that reporter's arm:

"I don't know this guy, I don't know exactly what happened, my understanding is that he grabbed somebody, and that's frankly totally and completely inappropriate. It could have been one of my daughters for that matter"

It truly is a race to the bottom. These guys are so full of ####. How does anyone take anything they say seriously?

The only thing I am currently sure of is that America's next president will be significantly worse than Obama.

[Street Pharmacist]

Trump currently has a 70+% unfavorability rating with women. That is insane. That's half of your electorate Donald. Are there still people that think he can win?

[CorsiHockeyLeague]

Originally Posted by RougeUnderoos

The "sensible" one, Kasich, on this story about Trump's campaign manager grabbing that reporter's arm:

"I don't know this guy, I don't know exactly what happened, my understanding is that he grabbed somebody, and that's frankly totally and completely inappropriate. It could have been one of my daughters for that matter"

It truly is a race to the bottom. These guys are so full of ####. How does anyone take anything they say seriously?

Why is that statement objectionable? Am I missing something? I agree with him.

[Iowa_Flames_Fan]

Originally Posted by Street Pharmacist

Trump currently has a 70+% unfavorability rating. That is insane. That's half of your electorate Donald. Are there still people that think he can win?

Yes.

Donald Trump, for instance. He is probably Donald Trump's biggest supporter and fan.