Which of these two narratives do you think explains Trump's rise?

Discuss the news, current events, politics, celebrity gossip, etc.

Which of these two narratives do you think explains Trump's rise?

Unread postby poolerboy0077 » 16 November 2016, 06:49

I want your opinion as to the following narratives and the weight you think each played (if any) in the popularity of Donald Trump.


First narrative: Hyperbole and hysteria stoking a natural fear in a time of globalization

When Jon Stewart was interviewed by David Axelrod earlier this year, he said: "It's not as though this is inherent to this country [...] Globalization has created this strange push-back throughout the entire world. You see a lot of countries retreating into nativism [...] In some ways it's a natural reaction to fear. Now, if you have that fear stoked on a daily basis at an incredibly high pitch -- and this is not, "We really need to do something about this country; we're facing some difficult problems" -- this is, "You are run by a tyrant. He is going to take away your rights. We are falling. There are rapists and murders at the border coming to kill you." If that's what you've been fed and that's what you're buying into, Donald Trump makes more sense than anybody else out there because he's going, "Great! Let's build...the Visigoths are at the gates...let's build a fucking wall and not let -- it makes total sense. What wouldn't make sense are the general Republican leadership going, "There are Visigoths at the wall, they are here to kill you...let's try and not pass a new budget resolution." That's -- their rhetoric has never matched their action. Donald Trump is going, "Oh that's your rhetoric? Then, yeah, let's build a wall. [...] So the whole idea of political correctness is, "Everybody is so sensitive. Just get over it. You know, why should African Americans be so sensitive about police shootings? Why do they have to be so sensitive about years of systemic racism creating economic disparity? Come on! I'm not a slave owner. [...] Muslims... hey man, all he's saying is that they're evil and shouldn't be allowed in this country. He's just telling it like it is, but God forbid you say 'Happy Holidays' in December -- it's fucking war!" So who is it who's exactly sensitive here? We're only talking about what are the trigger points and the trigger points seem to me to be on one side grounded in a certain reality of life that only those with no experience or empathy towards what those individuals are going through are having, and the other seems to be clinging to a societal paradigm that just doesn't exist anymore and probably never did. When was America great? What is this time that he speaks of? '81 to '82? Like, what are we talking about? And who took your country away from you? Whose country -- whose is it?"



Second narrative: The election was generally a repudiation of the left and of political correctness in particular

Sam Harris recently made a podcast in which he offered his two cents on why Trump won. He said: "There are people who voted for Obama twice who voted for Trump. Racism cannot be the best way to explain that. Now this is where the prevailing analysis on the left is wrong -- of the sort that I just read from David Remnick in The New Yorker. Yes, we have just elected a man who was officially endorsed by the Ku Klux Klan. So you can be sure that every white racist in the country voted for Trump, but there are millions of other decent people who have reasonable concerns about a movement like Black Lives Matter, and most of these people probably voted for Trump too. These people are not racists. They were simply recoiling from charges of racism and from a toxic brand of identity politics. Much of what has been coming out of the left -- not everything, but much of it -- particularly about race, and about law and order, and about Islamophobia, about terrorism, about issues that are fundamental to the security of our society has had all the moral clarity and intellectual honesty of the O.J. verdict, which is to say none at all. And I'm confident that many people who don't perceive Trump to be a dangerous conman the way that I do probably voted for him out of sheer exasperation. They were sick of being called racist for not worrying about Halloween costumes on our Ivy League campuses. So millions of these people, along with real racists, told all you whinging social justice warriors at Yale and Brown to go fuck yourselves -- and can you really blame them? I mean, safe spaces? Trigger warnings? New gender pronouns? Getting Muslim students to deplatform speakers like Ayaan Hirsi Ali and Bill Maher? Was that the cause of your generation? That's the trench you're willing to die in? [...] Clinton was the sort of politician who in the immediate aftermath of the Orlando massacre spoke only about gun control and then issued grave warnings about the rise in Islamophobia when we had just suffered yet another jihadist atrocity on American soil. This was unforgivably stupid. [...] I even wrote a speech I thought Clinton should give about Islamism and jihadism and put it on my blog. It would have been so easy for her to have made sense on this issue and to have differentiated a sane understanding of jihadism from bigotry against Muslims in general. But she couldn't do it. She wouldn't do it. All of these things contributed to her loss."


I can anticipate some of your comments, but I'm curious to know what you think. I've seen these narratives the most online. Thots? :monocle:
Blow: "Nowadays even Liam can release an album of his screechy vocals and it'll probably go #1..."
Ramzus: I can admit that I'm horny just about 24/7
homomorphism: I used to not think your name was deshay and that Erick was just being racist
Hunter: sometimes I think I was literally born to be a pornstar
User avatar
poolerboy0077
 
Posts: 7262
+1s received: 1428
Joined: 20 December 2012, 21:20
Country: United States (us)

Re: Which of these two narratives do you think explains Trump's rise?

Unread postby Derek » 16 November 2016, 07:46

Third narrative: Trump didn't attract an unusual number of voters, Hillary attracted unusually few. She is so unpopular and easily vilified that even the worst elements of the Republican party were able to show themselves without throwing the election. The rest of the party fell in line like ions caught in a magnetic field.

I guess I think Harris is closer. The reactionary right got its day in the sunlight, but I don't think it's because Clinton provoked it. She just didn't have the appeal to shut them up.
User avatar
Derek
 
Posts: 5122
+1s received: 1367
Joined: 21 December 2012, 02:12
Country: United States (us)

Re: Which of these two narratives do you think explains Trump's rise?

Unread postby Yeauxleaux » 16 November 2016, 12:05

I think all three of those narratives hold weight, but I would add Pooler that both your narratives actually feed eachother. This nationalism and petty pro-censorship leftism play right into eachother, certainly on the topics of immigration and racism. They're two sides of the same coin.

People who would traditionally vote Left are frustrated with and feel alienated by this screaming radical Left. I'm not going to elaborate on that because that Sam Harris critique in The OP hits it perfectly, I have nothing to add.

But then, in walks Trump and the general alt-Right movement. We have to recognise that the alt-Right is an opportunist movement. Have you noticed how the alt-right are all about "rights" and "freedoms" and "freedom of speech" these days? In other words, they suddenly love all the principles that were fought for, by The Left, against The Right over the past few centuries. They can do that to appeal to traditional Leftists because they know The contemporary Left has dropped those crusades, and it's not sitting well with a lot of people in America (or Europe).

In the wake of Orlando, this pathetic excuse of a Left tap-danced around calling out anti-gay bigotry within Islam, so as not to offend Orthodox conservative Muslims. In walks Trump and, although it's coated in vitriolic nationalism and anti-immigrant sentiment, he "at least says something". Suddenly "gays for Trump" is a thing, even though any gay with any rational sense shouldn't really be voting that way. By moving into the space that The Left are leaving open, The Right take advantage of the frustrations of people in the Middle or Centre-Left and appeal to that voter base.

What's gone missing is a genuine rational discussion culture. You can take any "social issue" conversation right now, whether it's racism, sexism, "Islamophobia" (I hate that term, I prefer "anti-Muslim sentiment"), homophobia etc, you see the same thing. You are caught between two extremes, either "these forms of bigotry don't exist.", or "One of more of these forms of bigotry are to blame for absolutely everything". Both sides completely lack an ability to hold a meaningful productive conversation. It just devolves into online shouting matches, between two extremes who equally lack nuanced views.

Sorry for a long-winded post.
User avatar
Yeauxleaux
 
Posts: 1386
+1s received: 503
Joined: 27 November 2015, 21:06
Location: United Kingdom
Country: United Kingdom (gb)

Re: Which of these two narratives do you think explains Trump's rise?

Unread postby acpro » 16 November 2016, 20:38

Sam Harris emailed me once in 2011 and said I had a great idea... at least thats how I like to think it happened.

I think I emailed him and he responded but he RESPONDED.

I actually found it:
Nice. I like it.
Very glad you have found my work useful, Alex.
Best,
Sam
User avatar
acpro
 
Posts: 2056
+1s received: 289
Joined: 23 December 2012, 05:18
Country: United States (us)

Re: Which of these two narratives do you think explains Trump's rise?

Unread postby poolerboy0077 » 17 November 2016, 05:13

Derek wrote:Third narrative: Trump didn't attract an unusual number of voters, Hillary attracted unusually few.

Well, he may not have attracted an unusual number of voters by comparison to past elections, but being the guy that he is, he attracted a lot from his base than anyone of us would have anticipated. Over 75% of evangelicals (i.e., the values voters crowd) voted for an atheist pussy-grabber. He beat his Republican rivals while supporting anti-trade and protectionism, planning to default on our debt, spending a trillion in infrastructure, offending the military and vocally stating that he's not going after same-sex marriage.
Blow: "Nowadays even Liam can release an album of his screechy vocals and it'll probably go #1..."
Ramzus: I can admit that I'm horny just about 24/7
homomorphism: I used to not think your name was deshay and that Erick was just being racist
Hunter: sometimes I think I was literally born to be a pornstar
User avatar
poolerboy0077
 
Posts: 7262
+1s received: 1428
Joined: 20 December 2012, 21:20
Country: United States (us)

Re: Which of these two narratives do you think explains Trump's rise?

Unread postby Derek » 17 November 2016, 08:07

poolerboy0077 wrote:
Derek wrote:Third narrative: Trump didn't attract an unusual number of voters, Hillary attracted unusually few.

Well, he may not have attracted an unusual number of voters by comparison to past elections, but being the guy that he is, he attracted a lot from his base than anyone of us would have anticipated. Over 75% of evangelicals (i.e., the values voters crowd) voted for an atheist pussy-grabber. He beat his Republican rivals while supporting anti-trade and protectionism, planning to default on our debt, spending a trillion in infrastructure, offending the military and vocally stating that he's not going after same-sex marriage.

It's not like consistency in thought or action has ever been a staple of the Republican party. They think Hillary is the devil and Trump has enough of an "outsider" image to prop up the GOP's ridiculous false dichotomy.

I had a lengthy conversation about this with my mother, who I think voted Trump but wouldn't confirm it. Her girlfriend watches Fox and listens to Rush Limbaugh, so I got a glimpse into the echo chamber. Their perception is that all the horrible things about Trump are exaggerations that don't really matter. When I pressed her about his policies, she said her greatest concern was with social security and public spending, the runaway state of which she blames on the left and immigration. When I told her that Trump's tax plan was projected to increase the deficit by billions and that his immigration policies were unworkable, she said it's not like the left is going to fix it so why not try a new approach. When I said he was a pussygrabber who said horrible things about women, was slating idiots for his administration, has denied climate change (she hadn't even heard this), and has already offended several foreign governments, she said she thinks he is "funny" and expressed her doubt that any impactful changes will be made to anyone's lives anyway. I asked her if she thought that included racial minorities, vulnerable women, and the very poor, at which point the conversation changed to her many grievances with her liberal facebook friends and how everyone feels entitled to being babied by the government.

What I got from that conversation is that she is far from energized by Trump's rhetoric, but her perception of Hillary and the establishment left has been so far built down that no detail about Trump would dent her opinion. She did say she would have considered voting for Sanders. What a world.

I can't really make sense of the election. We had already learned from reality television that shame and decency don't actually matter to most people. I think the biggest surprise is just how much disdain voters have for Clinton and whatever they think it is she represents.
User avatar
Derek
 
Posts: 5122
+1s received: 1367
Joined: 21 December 2012, 02:12
Country: United States (us)

Re: Which of these two narratives do you think explains Trump's rise?

Unread postby rxxli » 17 November 2016, 18:44

I actually think that all three of the narratives presented here played into it.

But I am pretty sure that the first narrative comes closest to being right. People fear the unknown and fear the foreigners coming in. And by foreigners I mean people from non-western cultures. And Trump promised a solution (a stupid, but simple one). We've seen this throughout the world - first brexit, now this. It's definitely not limited to the US alone.
Image
User avatar
rxxli
 
Posts: 4230
+1s received: 208
Joined: 21 December 2012, 21:33
Country: Slovenia (si)

Re: Which of these two narratives do you think explains Trump's rise?

Unread postby Descuff » 18 November 2016, 00:01

I'd say all 2 (3 really).

I'm more inclined toward the first one because it seems there's this common fear and movement in most of the West.

I do think there's a lot of merit to the second one. I mean personally as a black man, I felt like Hillary done more to "call out" white privilege and systemic racism. Obama was always on-the-fence with racial issues, but Hillary's over here working with BLM and proposing criminal justice reform. She went far enough to call a portion of Trump's supporters basket of deplorables but of course that backfired as many Trump supporters took the term to mean themselves and waved it around proudly. Many non-racist Trump supporters overlooked the racism/sexism at best and voted their own interest. I mean for them, they don't really see that the racism demonstrated is that big of a deal yet many people of color are frighten or angry at his narrative.

Of course at the end of the day, I doubt most of these Trump supporters in my uni courses were motivated by racism/sexism or being called racists or political correctness. Rather talking to them I believe they were simply voting along party lines and didn't really like Hillary.
I wonder how many people know this is down here
Image
User avatar
Descuff
 
Posts: 2251
+1s received: 17
Joined: 10 September 2013, 14:59
Country: United States (us)

Re: Which of these two narratives do you think explains Trump's rise?

Unread postby Blerbjob » 18 November 2016, 03:32

-----
Last edited by Blerbjob on 31 January 2017, 01:44, edited 1 time in total.
Blerbjob
 
Posts: 105
+1s received: 3
Joined: 30 November 2015, 22:29
Country: United States (us)

Re: Which of these two narratives do you think explains Trump's rise?

Unread postby Sullivan » 18 November 2016, 03:41

My interactions with Trump people incline me toward Stewart's explanation. I really don't care for Harris's.

I'll maybe elaborate more at some point, if no one decides to make my points for me.
User avatar
Sullivan
 
Posts: 525
+1s received: 120
Joined: 25 July 2013, 02:12
Location: Chicago
Country: United States (us)

Re: Which of these two narratives do you think explains Trump's rise?

Unread postby poolerboy0077 » 19 November 2016, 20:07

Derek wrote:I guess I think Harris is closer.

Sullivan wrote:My interactions with Trump people incline me toward Stewart's explanation. I really don't care for Harris's.

I'll maybe elaborate more at some point, if no one decides to make my points for me.

Blow: "Nowadays even Liam can release an album of his screechy vocals and it'll probably go #1..."
Ramzus: I can admit that I'm horny just about 24/7
homomorphism: I used to not think your name was deshay and that Erick was just being racist
Hunter: sometimes I think I was literally born to be a pornstar
User avatar
poolerboy0077
 
Posts: 7262
+1s received: 1428
Joined: 20 December 2012, 21:20
Country: United States (us)

Re: Which of these two narratives do you think explains Trump's rise?

Unread postby Derek » 19 November 2016, 20:54

I'll go get the olive oil.
User avatar
Derek
 
Posts: 5122
+1s received: 1367
Joined: 21 December 2012, 02:12
Country: United States (us)

Re: Which of these two narratives do you think explains Trump's rise?

Unread postby Sherri » 19 November 2016, 23:34

I agree with Stewart. I read a Cracked article that Danby posted that explained pretty well how tons of people could have voted for him. It's particularly helpful in understanding the "Make America Great Again" spiel. Basically, they're just convinced that everything is "sin" (abortion, the welfare system, gay marriage, etc.) and that with all this sin, the country is being ruined. Everything would be great if we could just go back to being One Nation Under God and stop outsourcing all of our jobs and shafting rural America.

Even with that said, it still absolutely does my head in how any Christian anywhere justified that to themselves, but I went to work the day after the election and heard lots of exchanges that went like:

Person 1: "Trump won"
Person 2: "Oh, Praise Jesus!"
Person 3: "Right??"

and every Christian I know loved Trump. Like, they weren't just voting for him unhappily because he was not-Hillary, which I would have understood. That's why I voted for Hillary. She was not-Trump. But that wasn't it. They fucking loved Trump. They cheered him on and were thrilled he won. It's mind-boggling because he's everything the Bible says not to be. He's racist, sexist, incestuous, rapey, pervy, greedy, money-hungry, power-hungry, A through fucking Z pick something the bible tells you not to be and that's Trump. It's the biggest load of hypocrisy I've ever seen in my life. If nothing else was going to convince me that Christianity is a massive sham and is mostly used as a vehicle for so-called believers to house and express their prejudices safely, this would seal the deal.
The path to Heaven runs through miles of clouded Hell ~

"Deeds such as these do not go unnoticed by the universe. They echo in all who hear them. That is why I am here."


Image
User avatar
Sherri
Moderator
 
Posts: 1293
+1s received: 623
Joined: 20 December 2012, 20:12
Country: United States (us)

Re: Which of these two narratives do you think explains Trump's rise?

Unread postby TenTwentyFive » 20 November 2016, 00:48

Coming from some very conservative and christian circles (like my whole family), I can tell you that they all voted for Trump, and they all held their nose while they did it. As indicated, he's pretty damn anti-christian, anti-doctrine, and almost all the christians I know recognized that heartily. Only a small handful of those at my old church (still facebook friends with) were enthusiastically pro-trump, and they're the same guys I never had much confidence in to begin with.

No, I think if you're seeing droves of christians supporting trump, it's because that's what you got shown, not because that's what was going on. They DID all vote for him - because he's not a D. He claimed he was the anti-abortion candidate, and christians are frequently single-issue voters on the abortion thing. My wife, for instance, admits she knows absolutely nothing about politics and doesn't want to. But she'll vote, and vote whichever candidate is anti-abortion.

Obviously none of us have America's perspective as our own. Shit's different all in different corners. But this was my experience.

I couldn't support trump. I couldn't support Hilary either - she's just as, if not more, anti-gay than trump, and a duplicitous bitch on pretty much every single social position she put on her platform. I couldn't support either of them, not in any way. But..... in the end... possibly my somewhat conservative background coming into the equation... I did breath a small sigh of relief that he won <duck>

We know who that fucker is. And we can be pretty sure he works for himself.

Hilary, on the other hand - she's her master's hound, and who the fuck knows what wack ass shit her master has in mind.
I've got my blue-flag hanging off my bacc side - But.. only on the Left side; yea, that's the Crip side.
User avatar
TenTwentyFive
 
Posts: 40
+1s received: 7
Joined: 12 November 2016, 01:06
Location: Portland, Oregon
Country: United States (us)

Re: Which of these two narratives do you think explains Trump's rise?

Unread postby yagyug » 22 November 2016, 14:13

Personally I don't give much weight to most of the wild theories going round. Really I think it comes down to three things: voluntary voting, the fact that everyone knew what the result was "going" to be and Hillary being uninspiring.

People don't stand in queue, re-organise their day and drag along their friends and relatives for a candidate that they don't care that much about when the election is already in the bag.

Compare this campaign to Obama's last run. The narrative for everyone heading into the polls was that it was neck and neck and either candidate could win. Romney had mis-stepped and alienated the core repeatedly, and Obama was still a widely liked incumbent President with a large backing of various minorities, but still everyone rushed to the polls thinking Obama could lose, and in the end he wiped the floor with Romney.

This election Hilary did nothing to really win anyone over, other than it being apparently "her turn" to run the country. While people weren't as opposed to her as they were to Trump, they also weren't particularly pro-Hilary either, not enough to make them vote for her in her own right. Then the media declared it a guaranteed win about four weeks out from the election, and she started celebrating early, like at the roast of Trump that went viral. Come polling day, you're a Democrats supporter, you don't like Trump, but you've got work, you're tired, you've got to pick the kids up at four and also there's that meeting this afternoon. Well Hillary's already got it in the bag, what's one vote matter? It's not like this is a vote that you're going to be upset you missed. Which might be only say representative of 5% of Democrat voters, but that would have been more than enough to win Hillary the election.
User avatar
yagyug
Moderator
 
Posts: 629
+1s received: 28
Joined: 12 July 2013, 09:16
Country: Australia (au)

Re: Which of these two narratives do you think explains Trump's rise?

Unread postby Ciniselli » 22 November 2016, 16:08

I think the third explanation is the most convincing one. I'm sure there were plenty of conscientious people who feel that they cast their vote for Trump after careful deliberation, but the bulk of people who voted for him seem to be the kind of voters who are found in every two party system: people who would vote for anyone or anything if it has their party's colors on it.

This isn't meant to imply that Trump voters are particularly narrow-minded or dumb. There are plenty of people who live on the coasts who will do exactly the same for the Democrats.

The largest contingent of eligible voters were people who, for whatever reason, didn't vote. Among the possible reasons for this are apathy/antipathy towards the candidate, voter restriction in various forms, or because they lived in a safe state and felt their vote would be worthless. But even factoring in all of those it seems that there are people who Obama was able to turn out for the Democrats who Clinton was not able to - so I tend to side with the idea that she lost the election rather than Trump winning it.

I find the Harris/ "Political Correctness" argument really difficult to see. It's a very visceral kind of analysis - it seems to rely on feeling right and feeling like it fits rather than anything really substantial to support it. We all know that Breitbart et al are endlessly obsessed with the issue, but apart from scrapping together a few tabloid headlines it's really difficult to see that PC has any significant impact on the world outside of a few cloisters (universities, and some sections of the media). Certainly I can't see that political correctness was more of a big issue in this election than any other - Trump's transgressions go far, far beyond breaking the standards of political correctness and I think it's extremely illiterate to dismiss his critics by suggesting that is their only (or even main) concern.
Nonsense, I have not yet begun to defile myself.
User avatar
Ciniselli
 
Posts: 311
+1s received: 3
Joined: 8 March 2015, 16:17
Country: United Kingdom (gb)

Re: Which of these two narratives do you think explains Trump's rise?

Unread postby York » 22 November 2016, 17:44

i will not read as i always do. but trum won becoz time is changing.
He was turned to steel
in the great magnetic field
When he travelled time
for the future of mankind

BLACK SABBATH
User avatar
York
 
Posts: 750
+1s received: 6
Joined: 30 May 2014, 15:40

Re: Which of these two narratives do you think explains Trump's rise?

Unread postby Derek » 4 December 2016, 02:37

Some dumb article about some dumb HGTV show had this:

A few years ago, gay activists decided the best way to win arguments in favor of same-sex marriage was to shut up their opponents. All they had to do was lob a charge of homophobia and the argument was won. Or they tweeted at the companies that employed the “homophobes” until they were fired. Conservatives were bullied on social media and mocked for being ass-backward (and indeed, some of them were and are). But they were never taken seriously.

They were simply dismissed with a snarky RuPaul GIF. At the time, this seemed like a good strategy because, well, Hillary Clinton was a shoo-in for president and because the country was only becoming more and more liberal, and those kinds of hillbillies were being left in the dark.

Enter Trump — the voice of all of the people liberals and activists have been shutting up for the past eight years. It’s no secret that part of Trump’s success is owed to how skillfully he invalidated the media’s authority in the eyes of his conservative followers. The message was very clearly: The media doesn’t like me because I’m conservative, and they don’t like you because you’re conservative, and they’re going to try to ruin all of us, so let’s just ignore them.

I think that explanation goes a long way. I also thought Hillary was a shoo-in and I also thought our country couldn't possibly elect a man like Trump, which goes to show what a state of false security I was placed in by my choice of media. Conservatives are just as good as liberals at playing the victim (on top of being better at most other emotional angles), yet most of us didn't see it coming because we've gotten used to this atmosphere of perpetual accountability. Trump supporters are in love with the way he can say whatever he wants and somehow not get in trouble.
User avatar
Derek
 
Posts: 5122
+1s received: 1367
Joined: 21 December 2012, 02:12
Country: United States (us)

Re: Which of these two narratives do you think explains Trump's rise?

Unread postby Mod » 4 December 2016, 11:43

There's a fourth view isn't there? People in the industrial heartland hadn't seen improvement at the same rate as the coasts. Even places there that vastly improved since 2008, happened so incrementally it wasn't tangible.
This meant that people could easily buy into the narrative that they'd been marginalized by Washington so they put their money behind Trump to both signal their displeasure and with the hopes that a business man would generate more business inside the US.

I think it's a combination of all four.

The big takeaway is that it seems like a lot of people failed to see the nuances of their country.
It's also true that we have kinda retreated into our own media bubbles, even if you don't intend to be selective the algorithms that generate the content we see will do that for us.

Another noticeable idea is that the media is becoming increasingly unreliable to the level of fake news.
Flagship sites known for their fact checking will take a story from a blog with credit, another site references only the news site; this happens 4 more times, then another site writes a meta article about how big the story is because all the sites are talking about it. Before you know it a completely fake story has solidified and people are arguing over the finer points.

Oh and running a whole news cycle over a tweet from Trump.
It's at the point that some of the only news sites with focus are sites like Fox because they start their news day crafting a narrative rather than reacting to what's trending on twitter. It doesn't make Fox more truthful or any less biased, just that they're actually giving their stories time to generate which makes for a better news report.

That's the impression I get anyway. It's also the gist of what one of NZ's lead political Journalists said about it recently.

There's a bunch of really good points in this article. Trump rode in on a wave that he didn't make, he just became the scion somehow. The media took Trump literally, but the supporters took him figuratively; so when he reverses his positions the media blow up "There's no WALL!?" while his voters just shrugged.

And then afterwards, I met this couple, they were in their seventies, she had a college degree. By this point I was going up to people and saying, “In New Zealand, we think you’re crazy to be voting for this guy, and we think he’s crazy.” That’s how upfront I was being. And this woman said, “I’ve got a college degree,” and her husband said, “We’ve got this business, we’re pool cleaners.” Then he said, in reference to Trump’s “tomorrow you’ll get the change you’ve been waiting for”: “He’s not the right messenger, but he’s got the right message.”

--------------

What can you learn from the American experience, in terms of what you do next year?

All the criticisms – you think, that’s not me. Too insider, doing things the old way, not being open enough to an audience that is changing, not reaching out to real people, or spending any time outside of the beltway or the bubble. You think: that’s not me. But realistically, those are lessons to be learned from what’s happened with the US election or the US media. They’re confronting questions really, when you repeat them back to yourself as I just have. You think, I’m not chained to old ways, I didn’t come up in some institution – then you say, oh, yes I have, yes I have. They’re the sort of failings, you know? And it’s the old look-in-the-mirror scenario.

Is there anything in particular you’re thinking about?

It’s like everything, it’s an institution that’s been tested and it’s not one arm of it that’s broken, the whole thing buckled under pressure. Not just media, their electoral system as well. It’s the whole thing, it didn’t hold up to the stress. I don’t want to make another earthquake analogy, but, you know, it wasn’t one beam, it was the whole caboodle that didn’t hold up to this ginormous amount of pressure.


But with that all said I'll probably throw up a lung next time I hear that Trump won because rape jokes aren't OK any more.

p.s Eric you fuck I made that post you wanted fucken reply to it or something. :flame: :jihad: :flame:
Money can't buy happiness; but we'll sell it to you anyway.
Mod
 
Posts: 3156
+1s received: 146
Joined: 20 December 2012, 21:26

Re: Which of these two narratives do you think explains Trump's rise?

Unread postby Iago » 5 December 2016, 13:33

The institutional (e.g. voter-restriction laws, the electoral college) and strategic (e.g., the Clinton campaign's meagre allocation of resources and lack of effort in the swing states, their over-complicated and ineffective policy messaging) factors are easy enough to grasp, but I still find it difficult to get my head around people embracing Trump, even having read all the reasons in this thread and in the news coverage. He was so obviously a terrible candidate, yet people found ways to ignore and partition all his flaws.
User avatar
Iago
 
Posts: 277
+1s received: 3
Joined: 20 December 2012, 20:16

Next

Recently active
Users browsing this forum: CommonCrawl [Bot], Courage, Fiulaposm, Severelius and 7 guests