The Trump phenomenon 2

243 posts / 0 new
Last post
MegB
The Trump phenomenon 2

Continued from here.

Issues Pages: 
mark_alfred

http://www.theglobeandmail.com/opinion/trump-is-finished-trumpisms-here-...

Good article by Wente.  She argues that Trump is finished, given that he's crazy and the majority can see this.  But the circumstances of his getting as far as he did do need to change.

[quote]The greatest danger in his defeat would be if both Republicans and Democrats decide they were right all along, and don’t need to change. Because if they don’t, another Trump will come along. And the next one might not be crazy.[/quote]

kropotkin1951 kropotkin1951's picture

I think that Trump originally got into the race to do a Newt Gingrich. He was a perennial candidate for President who usually made more in fundraising than he spent on campaigning while living the high life during the campaign. It is one of the ways that a politician can make money in their system. Money has corrupted their political system in a myriad of ways.

[quote]

In Presidential politics, winning is no longer everything.  

Especially for Newt Gingrich, who has used his run for President as a kind of savvy marketing campaign built around his political persona.

In the last five years the former Speaker of the House has lived a life of luxury built around his empire, including millions in private jet travel, paid for with donations to a political group he founded. Gingrich's lifestyle also includes a million-dollar home in suburban Washington and jewelry from Tiffany's.

"You can do very well by running for President," said Scott Reed, a Republican strategist. "You don't always have to win."  

[/quote]

http://abcnews.go.com/Blotter/newt-gingrich-win-make-money/story?id=1384...

Michael Moriarity Michael Moriarity's picture

[quote=kropotkin1951]

I think that Trump originally got into the race to do a Newt Gingrich. He was a perennial candidate for President who usually made more in fundraising than he spent on campaigning while living the high life during the campaign. It is one of the ways that a politician can make money in their system. Money has corrupted their political system in a myriad of ways.

[/quote]

Well, there is a similarity, but the details differ. Gingrich was a small time grifter, looking for bigger marks to fleece for political donations which could be used to pay for his luxurious lifestyle. Trump, on the other hand, claimed to be worth $10 billion already, and promised to self fund his campaign. In his case, the scam was that he was increasing the value of his principal asset, his "brand". The price to put "Trump" in front of product X would hopefully increase significantly as a result of his campaign.

Sean in Ottawa

[quote=Michael Moriarity]

[quote=kropotkin1951]

I think that Trump originally got into the race to do a Newt Gingrich. He was a perennial candidate for President who usually made more in fundraising than he spent on campaigning while living the high life during the campaign. It is one of the ways that a politician can make money in their system. Money has corrupted their political system in a myriad of ways.

[/quote]

Well, there is a similarity, but the details differ. Gingrich was a small time grifter, looking for bigger marks to fleece for political donations which could be used to pay for his luxurious lifestyle. Trump, on the other hand, claimed to be worth $10 billion already, and promised to self fund his campaign. In his case, the scam was that he was increasing the value of his principal asset, his "brand". The price to put "Trump" in front of product X would hopefully increase significantly as a result of his campaign.

[/quote]

I wonder if, in the end, he might damage that brand more by this campaign.

If you take the number who presently say they would vote for him and remove those who are voting for him only becuase they dislike Clinton or he is the most right wing on the ballot and consider only those whose opinion of him has improved due to the campaign, I expect that it would be found that this was not worth the effort from a branding point of view.

Those who support Trump the Candidate would be open to his business brand, certainly, but were they before? And are they more likely to buy what he sells in business due to this campaign?

Those who do not support Trump the Candidate are they less likely to want to deal with Trump the business?

I suspect the second is more likely true than the former.

Opening yourself to almost daily examples of being proven unstable or a liar is not a great business branding strategy. Without having gained many people to his brand he may have limited its appeal to a subset of the general population.

Michael Moriarity Michael Moriarity's picture

Yes, it is quite possible that Trump may have screwed himself. However, as H. L. Mencken said, "Nobody ever went broke underestimating the taste of the American public."

Sean in Ottawa

[quote=Michael Moriarity]

Yes, it is quite possible that Trump may have screwed himself. However, as H. L. Mencken said, "Nobody ever went broke underestimating the taste of the American public."

[/quote]

This is true. But we are the crowd that believes in hope over fear, after all, so let's be optimistic and hope he screwed himself.

NorthReport

As expected scumbag Trump's campaign is now going into major fail, so the racist bully is now flailing about looking for someone besides himself to blame. We haven't seen anything yet of the coming Trump ugliness.

Trump Says “Disgusting and Corrupt” Media Responsible for Weak Poll Numbers

http://www.slate.com/blogs/the_slatest/2016/08/14/trump_blames_disgustin...

 

NorthReport

Trump’s Campaign Chief Listed in Ukraine Ledger Detailing Millions in Cash Payments

http://www.slate.com/blogs/the_slatest/2016/08/14/trump_campaign_chief_p...

josh

Trump is also expected to propose creating a new, ideological test for admission to the country that would assess a candidate's stances on issues like religious freedom, gender equality and gay rights. Through questionnaires, searching social media, interviewing friends and family or other means, applicants would be vetted to see whether they support American values like tolerance and pluralism. 

http://www.chicagotribune.com/news/nationworld/ct-donald-trump-terrorism-speech-20160815-story.html 

 

 

NorthReport

Duh!

As if that lets these right-wing racist shitheads off the hook.

Conservative Pundit Owns Up To Role In Trump’s Rise: We 'Created This Monster’

Charlie Sykes, the influential conservative talk radio host, has done some soul searching in the months since Donald Trump became the Republican Party standard-bearer, saying in a recent interview that he understands conservative media personalities have “created this monster.”

The Milwaukee radio host, who has been strongly anti-Trump, told Business Insider’s Oliver Darcy that conservative media talking heads, himself included, have “spent 20 years demonizing the liberal mainstream media.” While Sykes argued some of the criticism is “justifiable,” he said those years of attack have destroyed the credibility of media companies trying to fight Trump’s fact-proof campaign with deep reporting.

“When this is all over, we have to go back. There’s got to be a reckoning on all this,” Sykes said, according to an interview excerpt Darcy tweeted on Sunday. “We’ve created this monster.”

“And I am feeling, to a certain extent, that we are reaping the whirlwind at that. And I have to look in the mirror and ask myself, ‘To what extent did I contribute?’” he continued.

In response to Sykes remarks, conservative blogger Erick Erickson also took stock of his role fostering a movement that led to Trump’s candidacy.

“For some, like me, perhaps we pushed too hard on issues and held too many people to many promises we took more literally than we should. Perhaps we encouraged activists to have too little grace for others,” Erickson wrote at The Resurgent.

It’s worth reading the full excerpt, via Oliver Darcy:

 

View image on TwitterView image on Twitter


http://talkingpointsmemo.com/livewire/charlie-sykes-conservative-media-c...

NorthReport

Election Shift: From 'Mad as Hell' to 'Is Trump Qualified?'

http://www.realclearpolitics.com/articles/2016/08/15/election_shift_from...

NorthReport

These 2 clowns are doing one hell of a job - they are about as useless as Trump is!

IVANKA AND JARED’S POWER PLAY

How the patrician couple came to have an outsized influence on a populist Presidential campaign.

http://www.newyorker.com/magazine/2016/08/22/ivanka-trump-and-jared-kush...

NorthReport

All he has to do is look in the mirror!

Biting the Hand That Fed Him

The Republican nominee long used the media to project his fairy tale self-image but now blames the industry for his flailing campaign.

 

http://www.theatlantic.com/politics/archive/2016/08/biting-the-hand-that...

NorthReport
NorthReport

----

NorthReport

The Republican party must be shambles to have allowed a scumbag like Trump be their presidential nominee!

Trump's new normal

The floundering Republican nominee packs his foreign policy speech with go-to half-truths and divisive policy ideas.

http://www.politico.com/story/2016/08/trump-clinton-moral-clarity-227023

NorthReport

Trump’s damage has already been done: He has nurtured a generation of racist bullies

Win or lose, Trump has inspired a new wave of racial hostility in America, and capitalized on it


http://www.salon.com/2016/08/17/trumps-main-damage-has-already-been-done...

NorthReport
josh

Yet those who reduce Trumpism to a giant cultural yawp risk misinterpreting not only the data at hand, but also decades of research on how and why people vote.Survey data shows a strong connection between racial attitudes and Trump support. But economic anxiety also predicts Trump support, and it also correlates with racist attitudes. These factors make much more sense taken together rather than parceled out separately. 

 

https://www.washingtonpost.com/news/wonk/wp/2016/08/19/stop-blaming-raci...

mark_alfred

Just heard on the news that Trump got a new campaign manager.  From the clip on the news I gather that Trump will be taking a softer tone now.

Mr. Magoo

[quote]Just heard on the news that Trump got a new campaign manager.  From the clip on the news I gather that Trump will be taking a softer tone now.[/quote]

Wrong.  His new campaign manager is Triumph, the insult comic dog.

I kind of want to make more jokes to accompany that, but you can probably make them for yourself, in your head.

mark_alfred

An American rip-off of Ed the Sock.

NorthReport
NorthReport

An International Disaster: Trump Has Shown His True Side, It's Time To Act

http://www.spiegel.de/international/world/donald-trump-is-a-threat-to-th...

alan smithee alan smithee's picture

[quote=mark_alfred]

An American rip-off of Ed the Sock.

[/quote]

I scrolled down the page and saw your post and immediately thought you were talking about Trump. LOL! Misinterpreted but still funny.

NorthReport
NorthReport
NorthReport
NorthReport

Curt Schilling Is the Next Donald Trump

November looks bad for the white-guy grievance movement, but new filterless dimwits wait in the wings

 

http://www.rollingstone.com/politics/features/curt-schilling-is-the-next...

josh

Trump, who won the Republican primary in significant part because of a promise to deport all 11 million of America's illegal immigrants, is now musing publicly about allowing most of those people to stay."Incorrect descriptions of this: pivot, softening, moderating. Correct descriptions of this: 180, total reversal, flip-flop," Tim Alberta, chief political correspondent for the conservative National Review, wrote on Twitter. 

https://www.thestar.com/news/world/2016/08/25/ann-coulter-fumes-as-donal...

Trump spokeswoman Katrina Pearson on CNN: "Trump hasn't changed his position on immigration, he has changed the words that he is saying." 

Sean in Ottawa

[quote=josh]

Trump spokeswoman Katrina Pearson on CNN: "Trump hasn't changed his position on immigration, he has changed the words that he is saying." 

[/quote]

This is the absolute finest admission of lying that I have ever seen from a campaign.

Pondering

It's all a game. The powers that be are getting exactly what they want. A Clinton presidency. The Republican party might care about itself but the powers that be don't. They made sure Sanders didn't get the Democratic nomination so they could safely let the Republican party fail. Of course it will be rejuvenated soon enough to attack the Democrats. As long as the Democrats and Republicans are the only two dogs in the fight all is well in the world. It's all just theatre. Even racism is a distraction from the core problem. We are ruled by royalty (not politicians).

Sean in Ottawa

[quote=Pondering]

It's all a game. The powers that be are getting exactly what they want. A Clinton presidency. The Republican party might care about itself but the powers that be don't. They made sure Sanders didn't get the Democratic nomination so they could safely let the Republican party fail. Of course it will be rejuvenated soon enough to attack the Democrats. As long as the Democrats and Republicans are the only two dogs in the fight all is well in the world. It's all just theatre. Even racism is a distraction from the core problem. We are ruled by royalty (not politicians).

[/quote]

Some of this sounds like intelligent design where intelligence has not proven to exist.

I agree with the effects, and that powerful actors exist here but not sure about the existence of this grand a conspiracy.

Pondering

https://www.theguardian.com/commentisfree/2016/aug/24/hillary-clinton-he...

It’s almost as if Trump is reading from a textbook on how to invent and disseminate conspiracy theories. First, target those who feel most alienated and disempowered. Then, identify a complex social or political threat to control, which might include stagnant wages, demographic changes or terrorism. Next, identify an outsider group such as China, Latino immigrants, blacks or Muslims who you can blame. Then tell a simple, black-and-white story of conflict between good versus evil, us versus the other. Finally, say the system is “rigged” by the mainstream media or the elite.

Trump is riding a rising tide of alienation and disempowerment, most notably among working class white men. They’re his strongest supporters because uncertainty, anxiety and powerlessness drive the need to reassert control. It’s also perhaps why those with a more authoritarian bent tend to favor Trump.

But the left continues to miss the boat. The very people who should be the left's strongest supporters are supporting the right and it is the fault of the left for refusing to get out of their own bubble, something the right has no trouble doing.

The right is focused while the left plays defence and plays into the narrative of the right trying to assure people the left isn't extremist when it is the right that is extremist.

Sean in Ottawa

[quote=Pondering]

https://www.theguardian.com/commentisfree/2016/aug/24/hillary-clinton-he...

It’s almost as if Trump is reading from a textbook on how to invent and disseminate conspiracy theories. First, target those who feel most alienated and disempowered. Then, identify a complex social or political threat to control, which might include stagnant wages, demographic changes or terrorism. Next, identify an outsider group such as China, Latino immigrants, blacks or Muslims who you can blame. Then tell a simple, black-and-white story of conflict between good versus evil, us versus the other. Finally, say the system is “rigged” by the mainstream media or the elite.

Trump is riding a rising tide of alienation and disempowerment, most notably among working class white men. They’re his strongest supporters because uncertainty, anxiety and powerlessness drive the need to reassert control. It’s also perhaps why those with a more authoritarian bent tend to favor Trump.

But the left continues to miss the boat. The very people who should be the left's strongest supporters are supporting the right and it is the fault of the left for refusing to get out of their own bubble, something the right has no trouble doing.

The right is focused while the left plays defence and plays into the narrative of the right trying to assure people the left isn't extremist when it is the right that is extremist.

[/quote]

I agree with you in terms of the problem but not really with the root of it. The ordinary people in the states are screwed and they know it.

Trump knows this is the case and is actually saying it directly -- says to African Americans "Vote for me -- I hate you and I am a racist pig -- but what have you got to lose? The Democrats won't do better." And they know, on this, Trump is correrct.

The social justice problem in the US comes from some people having too much. The Democrats don't want to come out and say some need to make do with less and so they maintain the fiction that things can be made better without anyone hurting. They have done this for generations. They have taken good care of wealthy donors along the way.

The right of course have a simple argument -- they say the poor have too much -- they want to cut health care, food stamps, assistance etc. They pretend this will go to the middle and maybe they will throw a couple nickles to the middle as the dollars go to the top.

The middle and low income people are really hurting and things are hopeless. The right want to turn the middle on the bottom. Tell the middle white folk who are suffering they are poor becuase the poor take welfare, becuase of economic migrants, minorities.... This lets the top class get away with taking the booty. The middle stays struggling and vulnerable to support the next money grab from the most disadvantaged. But the Democrats in pretending they can create justice without the rich giving up money lack credibility. Now, increasingly, that's where the money is.

Sanders was popular becuase he has come the closest to telling the truth -- "some of you have so much that other people are not making it and you need to have less." His party are not fond of that message as you can imagine. I don't even know if it could win a general election -- it is possible that it would not.

Since we are in Canada we have the same problem. Both the NDP and the Liberals played this game in the last election. The NDP pretended that you could have social justice without business and the wealthy paying more -- this is a big part of what earned the NDP its greatest loss of sitting members in history. The Liberals played it differently. They pretended to help the middle when they were really helping those close to the top and they pretended that an increase on taxes above $200,000 would be enough. They conned the population into thinking they had real broadbased relief going to the middle. The truth is they helped families with children (not saying that was not worthy) and those who were very well off and some money from the extremely well off helped to pay for it. Everyone else in the middle got little to nothing. Everyone else has to pick up the difference in government debt or lost services.

In both cases Liberals and NDP told the public we will give you social justice but it won't cost you anything. They say the same of the environment. And the Democrats peddle the same shite in the US. This is why nobody in the middle gains -- it is great in theory but those with the cash won't pay for it. And the Democrats need donations from with those with the cash.

mark_alfred

[quote]

But the left continues to miss the boat. The very people who should be the left's strongest supporters are supporting the right and it is the fault of the left for refusing to get out of their own bubble, something the right has no trouble doing.

The right is focused while the left plays defence and plays into the narrative of the right trying to assure people the left isn't extremist when it is the right that is extremist.

[/quote]

Yes, while the right rides the boat the people who should be the left's strongest supports are in the bubble supporting the right rather than leaving the bubble, which the right, recognizing bubbles, certainly does do with no trouble.  The left sits alone on a stool, playing narrative fiddle of the right, assuring the people that the left aren't extremist.  Yet it's the right playing offence of the narrative of left extremism.  In reality they're the ones playing the fiddle of extemism while riding the boat that the left continues to miss.  They've missed the boat and have not gotten out of bubbles. 

Pondering

[quote=Sean in Ottawa]

[quote=Pondering]

It's all a game. The powers that be are getting exactly what they want. A Clinton presidency. The Republican party might care about itself but the powers that be don't. They made sure Sanders didn't get the Democratic nomination so they could safely let the Republican party fail. Of course it will be rejuvenated soon enough to attack the Democrats. As long as the Democrats and Republicans are the only two dogs in the fight all is well in the world. It's all just theatre. Even racism is a distraction from the core problem. We are ruled by royalty (not politicians).

[/quote]

Some of this sounds like intelligent design where intelligence has not proven to exist.

I agree with the effects, and that powerful actors exist here but not sure about the existence of this grand a conspiracy.

[/quote]

I don't see a grand conspiracy. The uber wealthy, or a subset of them, have enormous influence over politics worldwide. We say corporations but corporations are not people. It is the people who own corporations that are pulling the strings. They don't have absolute power over politicians because we still have a semblance of democracy that forces politicians to bow to strong public opinion but on everything else they are free to give in to pressure from their paymasters.

From the perspective of multi-billionaires that are world citizens everything is going splendidly. They control the media. They could have stopped Trump from getting anywhere near this successful. They could easily have backed one of the more moderate opponents. The more important task was stopping Sanders.

The generationally wealthy worldwide are focused on protecting their wealth and power for generations to come. Their plans are very longterm. 20 year depressions don't impact them permanently. They can afford to punish countries like Greece and even use it as an excuse to scoop up property. Tax havens have been around for as long as I can remember. Are successive governments just forgetful about taking care of that? Why are credit card companies able to forbid stores from offering discounts for cash payment? Why is consumer protection so weak in general? Why are we signing trade deals with shocking rights for corporations? Why do we bemoan worker abuse in other countries then not make mandatory work conditions an aspect of trade agreements? 

I submit because it is not in the best interests of the uberwealthy.

Sean in Ottawa

[quote=mark_alfred]

[quote]

But the left continues to miss the boat. The very people who should be the left's strongest supporters are supporting the right and it is the fault of the left for refusing to get out of their own bubble, something the right has no trouble doing.

The right is focused while the left plays defence and plays into the narrative of the right trying to assure people the left isn't extremist when it is the right that is extremist.

[/quote]

Yes, while the right rides the boat the people who should be the left's strongest supports are in the bubble supporting the right rather than leaving the bubble, which the right, recognizing bubbles, certainly does do with no trouble.  The left sits alone on a stool, playing narrative fiddle of the right, assuring the people that the left aren't extremist.  Yet it's the right playing offence of the narrative of left extremism.  In reality they're the ones playing the fiddle of extemism while riding the boat that the left continues to miss.  They've missed the boat and have not gotten out of bubbles. 

[/quote]

I hope this is a mixed metaphor parody here becuase I am lost by the end of line 2.

Sean in Ottawa

[quote=Pondering]

[quote=Sean in Ottawa]

[quote=Pondering]

It's all a game. The powers that be are getting exactly what they want. A Clinton presidency. The Republican party might care about itself but the powers that be don't. They made sure Sanders didn't get the Democratic nomination so they could safely let the Republican party fail. Of course it will be rejuvenated soon enough to attack the Democrats. As long as the Democrats and Republicans are the only two dogs in the fight all is well in the world. It's all just theatre. Even racism is a distraction from the core problem. We are ruled by royalty (not politicians).

[/quote]

Some of this sounds like intelligent design where intelligence has not proven to exist.

I agree with the effects, and that powerful actors exist here but not sure about the existence of this grand a conspiracy.

[/quote]

I don't see a grand conspiracy. The uber wealthy, or a subset of them, have enormous influence over politics worldwide. We say corporations but corporations are not people. It is the people who own corporations that are pulling the strings. They don't have absolute power over politicians because we still have a semblance of democracy that forces politicians to bow to strong public opinion but on everything else they are free to give in to pressure from their paymasters.

From the perspective of multi-billionaires that are world citizens everything is going splendidly. They control the media. They could have stopped Trump from getting anywhere near this successful. They could easily have backed one of the more moderate opponents. The more important task was stopping Sanders.

The generationally wealthy worldwide are focused on protecting their wealth and power for generations to come. Their plans are very longterm. 20 year depressions don't impact them permanently. They can afford to punish countries like Greece and even use it as an excuse to scoop up property. Tax havens have been around for as long as I can remember. Are successive governments just forgetful about taking care of that? Why are credit card companies able to forbid stores from offering discounts for cash payment? Why is consumer protection so weak in general? Why are we signing trade deals with shocking rights for corporations? Why do we bemoan worker abuse in other countries then not make mandatory work conditions an aspect of trade agreements? 

I submit because it is not in the best interests of the uberwealthy.

[/quote]

I can fully endorse this. Yes I agree with this dynamic.

I would add that this is aided by a public that in the volume of choices is bost the most aware and the least aware in generations. Manipulation has always been there but it is more sophisticated than ever with organizations even being created to do the opposite of what they appear created to do.

And when you follow the money and the Democrat brand it is easy to see that they fail becuase they do not intend to succeed.

Pondering

[quote=Sean in Ottawa] I agree with you in terms of the problem but not really with the root of it. The ordinary people in the states are screwed and they know it.

Trump knows this is the case and is actually saying it directly -- says to African Americans "Vote for me -- I hate you and I am a racist pig -- but what have you got to lose? The Democrats won't do better." And they know, on this, Trump is correrct. [/quote]

I think the same dynamics exist in Canada and the result was Ford.

[quote=Sean in Ottawa] The social justice problem in the US comes from some people having too much. The Democrats don't want to come out and say some need to make do with less and so they maintain the fiction that things can be made better without anyone hurting. They have done this for generations. They have taken good care of wealthy donors along the way.

The right of course have a simple argument -- they say the poor have too much -- they want to cut health care, food stamps, assistance etc. They pretend this will go to the middle and maybe they will throw a couple nickles to the middle as the dollars go to the top. [/quote]

Here too. Canada may be less extreme but the line for decades has been that we can't afford our social services.

[quote=Sean in Ottawa] The middle and low income people are really hurting and things are hopeless. The right want to turn the middle on the bottom. Tell the middle white folk who are suffering they are poor becuase the poor take welfare, becuase of economic migrants, minorities.... This lets the top class get away with taking the booty. The middle stays struggling and vulnerable to support the next money grab from the most disadvantaged. But the Democrats in pretending they can create justice without the rich giving up money lack credibility. Now, increasingly, that's where the money is.  [/quote]

Absolutely, and the same is occurring in Canada.

[quote=Sean in Ottawa] Sanders was popular becuase he has come the closest to telling the truth -- "some of you have so much that other people are not making it and you need to have less." His party are not fond of that message as you can imagine. I don't even know if it could win a general election -- it is possible that it would not.  [/quote]

In polls Sanders beat Trump by a higher margin than Clinton but the party still chose Clinton.

[quote=Sean in Ottawa] Since we are in Canada we have the same problem. Both the NDP and the Liberals played this game in the last election. The NDP pretended that you could have social justice without business and the wealthy paying more -- this is a big part of what earned the NDP its greatest loss of sitting members in history. The Liberals played it differently. They pretended to help the middle when they were really helping those close to the top and they pretended that an increase on taxes above $200,000 would be enough. They conned the population into thinking they had real broadbased relief going to the middle. The truth is they helped families with children (not saying that was not worthy) and those who were very well off and some money from the extremely well off helped to pay for it. Everyone else in the middle got little to nothing. Everyone else has to pick up the difference in government debt or lost services.  [/quote]

Again fully agree. That Trudeau was the one to use the language of occupy and the one to say he would tax the wealthy just left me shaking my head. Almost surreal.

[quote=Sean in Ottawa] In both cases Liberals and NDP told the public we will give you social justice but it won't cost you anything. They say the same of the environment. And the Democrats peddle the same shite in the US. This is why nobody in the middle gains -- it is great in theory but those with the cash won't pay for it. And the Democrats need donations from with those with the cash.  [/quote]

Yes, although as you noted above, it's not the public that has to pay, it's the wealthy. The right has done a good job of convincing people that it's the wealthy and the middle class against the poor when in truth it is the middle class and the poor who share common cause.

 

 

 

 

[/quote]

Sean in Ottawa

[quote=Pondering]

[quote=Sean in Ottawa] I agree with you in terms of the problem but not really with the root of it. The ordinary people in the states are screwed and they know it.

Trump knows this is the case and is actually saying it directly -- says to African Americans "Vote for me -- I hate you and I am a racist pig -- but what have you got to lose? The Democrats won't do better." And they know, on this, Trump is correrct. [/quote]

I think the same dynamics exist in Canada and the result was Ford.

[quote=Sean in Ottawa] The social justice problem in the US comes from some people having too much. The Democrats don't want to come out and say some need to make do with less and so they maintain the fiction that things can be made better without anyone hurting. They have done this for generations. They have taken good care of wealthy donors along the way.

The right of course have a simple argument -- they say the poor have too much -- they want to cut health care, food stamps, assistance etc. They pretend this will go to the middle and maybe they will throw a couple nickles to the middle as the dollars go to the top. [/quote]

Here too. Canada may be less extreme but the line for decades has been that we can't afford our social services.

[quote=Sean in Ottawa] The middle and low income people are really hurting and things are hopeless. The right want to turn the middle on the bottom. Tell the middle white folk who are suffering they are poor becuase the poor take welfare, becuase of economic migrants, minorities.... This lets the top class get away with taking the booty. The middle stays struggling and vulnerable to support the next money grab from the most disadvantaged. But the Democrats in pretending they can create justice without the rich giving up money lack credibility. Now, increasingly, that's where the money is.  [/quote]

Absolutely, and the same is occurring in Canada.

[quote=Sean in Ottawa] Sanders was popular becuase he has come the closest to telling the truth -- "some of you have so much that other people are not making it and you need to have less." His party are not fond of that message as you can imagine. I don't even know if it could win a general election -- it is possible that it would not.  [/quote]

In polls Sanders beat Trump by a higher margin than Clinton but the party still chose Clinton.

[quote=Sean in Ottawa] Since we are in Canada we have the same problem. Both the NDP and the Liberals played this game in the last election. The NDP pretended that you could have social justice without business and the wealthy paying more -- this is a big part of what earned the NDP its greatest loss of sitting members in history. The Liberals played it differently. They pretended to help the middle when they were really helping those close to the top and they pretended that an increase on taxes above $200,000 would be enough. They conned the population into thinking they had real broadbased relief going to the middle. The truth is they helped families with children (not saying that was not worthy) and those who were very well off and some money from the extremely well off helped to pay for it. Everyone else in the middle got little to nothing. Everyone else has to pick up the difference in government debt or lost services.  [/quote]

Again fully agree. That Trudeau was the one to use the language of occupy and the one to say he would tax the wealthy just left me shaking my head. Almost surreal.

[quote=Sean in Ottawa] In both cases Liberals and NDP told the public we will give you social justice but it won't cost you anything. They say the same of the environment. And the Democrats peddle the same shite in the US. This is why nobody in the middle gains -- it is great in theory but those with the cash won't pay for it. And the Democrats need donations from with those with the cash.  [/quote]

Yes, although as you noted above, it's not the public that has to pay, it's the wealthy. The right has done a good job of convincing people that it's the wealthy and the middle class against the poor when in truth it is the middle class and the poor who share common cause.

[/quote]

[/quote]

Yep seems like we are entirely in agreement on all this -- I especally like your last paragraph. It is classic divide and conquer diversion. This is also what is happening in the UK as well. Hopelessness does lead to extremism.

This is being written large across the world as wealthy countries blame developing ones for environmental problems when they are still extracting the wealth from those countries and got rich themselves doing the very thing they want the developing nations to stop doing.

This is the MO for the most wealthy globally.

bekayne

Image result for brexit 4chan

NorthReport
alan smithee alan smithee's picture

Donnie Drumpf should go back to his country of origin,Germany, and become leader of the NPD.

Special memo to the alt-right. America is NOT a white nation,you're NOT the native people of said country either.

Move to Europe. But I doubt they'd welcome you,except for that TWIT Nigel Fatass or whatever that motherfucker's name is.

NorthReport

Trump is attempting to meet with the Mexican President possibly tomorrow in Mexico City after holdin a rally tonite in a not a fucking chance he will take the state, Washington

Is the Mexican President nuts as well?

NorthReport

Trump is attempting to meet with the Mexican President possibly tomorrow in Mexico City after holdin a rally tonite in the not a fucking chance he will take the state, Washington

Is the Mexican President nuts as well?

Sean in Ottawa

[quote=NorthReport]Trump is attempting to meet with the Mexican President possibly tomorrow in Mexico City after holdin a rally tonite in the not a fucking chance he will take the state, Washington Is the Mexican President nuts as well?[/quote]

This is his secret plan to make them want to build a wall to keep him out.

Sean in Ottawa

Interesting how the right wing in the US forgot the bargain they made with "illegal immigrants."

Now Trump wants to get rid of them suddenly and many Republicans are supporting this.

This was the bargain:

Illegal immigrants form a second class of people with fewer rights. They work in many areas where they can be exploited but have no recourse due to their status. Getting rid of them eliminates much of the near slave labour the US uses -- work often well below minimum wage and without rights.

When you hear Trump saying he is going to get rid of illegal immigrants -- you have to understand the flip side of that statement. They are going to need (from the GOP point of viewe) to find another replacement workforce to exploit.

There are two sources to fix this that republicans support and people need to understand that this is a package deal:

1) They will want to roll back wages and benfits for the lowest paid workers in order to exploit the US's own domestic "underclass." This means more attacks on unions, lower minimum wages, fewer workplace protections and benefits.

2) They will ramp up private jails in order to bolster the slave population in the United States becuase that is what prisoners are. It means they will have to advance the "war on drugs" which is one of the greatest supports for US slave labour. Any of Obama's attempts to roll back private prisons will have to go.

Do not expect that these Republicans will let the rich lose anything when all this labour leaves...

iyraste1313

very chilling report from Eric London of wsws.org........

¨In reality, Trump’s speech elaborated a fascistic ten-point plan involving mass deportation and martial law.

He repeated his calls for building a border wall stretching from the Pacific Ocean to the Gulf of Mexico: “We will use the best technology, including above and below ground sensors that’s the tunnels [sic]…Towers, aerial surveillance and manpower to supplement the wall…”

He called for an absolute bar on granting entry to any immigrant with a criminal record, including those convicted of the “crime” of entering the US without inspection and those with minor crimes like driving under the influence. All those with criminal records would be immediately rounded up on “day one” of a Trump administration, and this would be done “in joint operation with local, state, and federal law enforcement.” Trump then said that immigrants arrestedfor any crime—not convicted—would be immediately placed into removal proceedings. Further, Trump called for “strong” mandatory minimum sentences for those migrants who attempt to reenter the country without papers after a prior deportation.

To enforce the mass round-up of millions of undocumented workers, Trump called for a drastic expansion of police and immigration agencies. He called for the creation of “a new special deportation task force” within Immigration and Customs Enforcement (ICE) aimed at speeding up deportations, and called for granting local police the power to hand over arrestees to immigration authorities: “Finally we will turn the tables and law enforcement and our police will be allowed to clear up this dangerous and threatening mess,” he said.

Trump also called for immediately canceling the DACA program which has allowed several million young undocumented people who were raised in the United States to remain in the US on a temporary basis. He also proposed suspending visa issuance from “any place where adequate screening cannot occur,” and called for “screening tests” with “an ideological certification to make sure that those we are admitting to our country share our values and love our people.” Finally, Trump called for preventing undocumented workers from receiving food stamps, subsidized medical care, public education or any other social services.

Trump combines his proposal with a fascistic demagogic appeal to American “workers” in an attempt to pit them against their class brothers and sisters who have immigrated from Latin America and elsewhere on the planet. Trump claimed that the purpose of his program is “to serve the best interests of America and its workers, the forgotten people. Workers. We’re going to take care of our workers.” He added: “Under a Trump administration it’s called America first. Remember that.”

But Trump’s speech is a dire warning to the working class of all national backgrounds.

The imposition of Trump’s plan would require a mass mobilization of hundreds of thousands of police, FBI, ICE, and military personnel in every major American city. Working class neighborhoods would be placed on lockdown and militarized detachments would forcibly take immigrants from their homes and places of work. Entire cities like Los Angeles, San Jose, San Diego, Chicago, Dallas, Phoenix, Miami, and Tucson would be placed under martial law. If such efforts are met with any resistance, violent government crackdowns would follow.

Due to insufficient space in existing immigrant detention facilities, immigrants would have to be held en masse in impromptu concentration camps before being deported. Though immigrants are legally entitled to a short trial before removal, the government would likely do away with this right or undercut it substantially. After those with criminal records are removed in this way, those remaining 10 million immigrants who refuse to leave the country voluntarily would be rounded up next. Those caught attempting to bypass the newly constructed wall would be arrested or possibly shot by drone or sentry.¨

...what goes in the States will come here guaranteed

 

Mr. Magoo

[quote]He repeated his calls for building a border wall stretching from the Pacific Ocean to the Gulf of Mexico: “We will use the best technology, including above and below ground sensors that’s the tunnels [sic]…Towers, aerial surveillance and manpower to supplement the wall…”[/quote]

And just this one paragraph alone is enough to make me wonder how anyone could suggest, with a straight face, that Trump and Clinton are "the same".

Pages