The Trump Presidency

[cfbandyman]

I understand how he won.  As SD said, I don't think this was about Obama v Drumpf.  I do think it was largely about "putting the whole system on trial."  A combination of Hillary being very much a part of the system along with her being a shitty candidate in general was enough. 

I still struggle with how a majority of Drumpf supporters agree that he is lying but somehow trust him.  There are probably rare instances, but I don't think Obama or Bush blatantly lied to the public.  They largely intended to do pretty much everything they said they did.  Drumpf is not going to try to build a wall.  He is not going to appoint a special investigator to lock Hillary up.  He is not going to ban Muslim immigrants.  I don't know any reasonable person that thinks he will even try to do these things.  But there are reasonable people that trust him to carry out other campaign promises.  That disconnect is strange to me.

This is pretty much where I'm at. I totally get a lot of people's sense, both real and imaginary of disenfranchisement (it's a common bond for example with Bernie supporters, people unable to advance or shut out in basically economic purgatory),

I get people hating a lot of corruption, back room dealing thing (though I really just assume that anyone in position of power, regardless or country, or type of position, be it president, chancellor, senator,  dictator, CEO, is doing that anyways, it's "just the way it's done" and while I don't like it, I just also assume that from that high of a vista some sort of greasing the wheels is needed to get things done)

So I get the anger, and wanting to upset the apple cart, take a chance and change things up, but it's just that. Him? Trump? The guy who's proven time and again to only enrich himself and burn everything else down, and has done that well before any of this presidential run nonsense. How you can trust him but he lies about a lot of things, and be ok about that, but Hillary has done several not great things either, but even if she happens to speak a truth, it can't be, she's not allowed any sort of a benefit of a doubt. Granted, she was a very poor candidate, so I'm not here to overly defend her, but it does speak to ChiCat's disconnect. I feel/think/see a lot of this disconnect as well.

I guess the thing I personally underestimated was a large populations hatred of the "establishment." I guess it's good to recognized how mumped everyone has been getting by the elites, I just find it funny the pick the "born into" prototypical version of it, rather than the self made version of it.

[cfbandyman]

How trump won seems to be obvious.  He simply got info on what ppl didn't like about whatevs candidate he was up against at that specific time(primary vs gen) and said he was against that thing and would do the opposite of that thing. 

Why it worked so perfectly well is the question.

This is the heart of it for sure. Definitely confirmation bias, and a lot of hearing what you want to hear. My theory isn't simply people are suckers, there are plenty for each side that will blindly vote for someone simply based on a R or D next to their name, it'd be that the desire to say "eff you" to the man and hearing things that feel good rather than are good outweigh just about anything else.

[Phil Titola]

Burned by elitist....pick the elitist to be president...that's what I don't get.  I guess maybe he was "our elitist" for many....they fit what they knew...older white guy who spoke his mind and didn't care about PC...who knew being PC pissed so many off.

[K-S-U-Wildcats!]

I understand how he won.  As SD said, I don't think this was about Obama v Trump.  I do think it was largely about "putting the whole system on trial."  A combination of Hillary being very much a part of the system along with her being a shitty candidate in general was enough. 

I still struggle with how a majority of Trump supporters agree that he is lying but somehow trust him.  There are probably rare instances, but I don't think Obama or Bush blatantly lied to the public.  They largely intended to do pretty much everything they said they did.  Trump is not going to try to build a wall.  He is not going to appoint a special investigator to lock Hillary up.  He is not going to ban Muslim immigrants.  I don't know any reasonable person that thinks he will even try to do these things.  But there are reasonable people that trust him to carry out other campaign promises.  That disconnect is strange to me.

You first asked why people voted for Trump even if they didn't think he would actually build the wall. I explained why.

Now you are asking why "a majority of people think he is lying but still trust him." I'm not sure that either part of that question is necessarily true. Some people think he's lying about the wall, some don't. Some trust him as a general matter, some don't. And some people generally trust him despite lying about wall because they understand politics. Speculating about this is pretty pointless. What matters is that they voted for him, and I think most of them won't be all that butthurt if he doesn't actually build the wall.

[gatoveintisiete]

There's some truth to that quote but if you don't take him at his word, what on earth are you voting for?  It's mind blowing to me that a candidate can say "I'm going to build a wall and make Mexico pay for it" and have no expectations that he is going to try to build a wall and have Mexico pay for it.  I don't know how people could vote for a guy and then go "Well he wasn't being serious when he said these things but was serious when he said the things that I like."

All of this isn't a knock on Trump voters, but an effort to understand.  Post-election Chicat's belief is still that Trump is a terrible candidate/future president but that the Democrats somehow did EVEN WORSE.

Do you remember "we're gonna create or SAVE a gazzillion jobs" or "if you like your health insurance policy you can keep it, this is not a tax, and premiums will go down by $2200 a year!"  This stuff was never going to be true but Mexico will pay for the wall. 

[Fake Sugar Dick (WARNING, NOT THE REAL SUGAR DICK!)]

There's some truth to that quote but if you don't take him at his word, what on earth are you voting for?  It's mind blowing to me that a candidate can say "I'm going to build a wall and make Mexico pay for it" and have no expectations that he is going to try to build a wall and have Mexico pay for it.  I don't know how people could vote for a guy and then go "Well he wasn't being serious when he said these things but was serious when he said the things that I like."

All of this isn't a knock on Trump voters, but an effort to understand.  Post-election Chicat's belief is still that Trump is a terrible candidate/future president but that the Democrats somehow did EVEN WORSE.

Do you remember "we're gonna create or SAVE a gazzillion jobs" or "if you like your health insurance policy you can keep it, this is not a tax, and premiums will go down by $2200 a year!"  This stuff was never going to be true but Mexico will pay for the wall. 

It's quite amusing to watch a group of people who elected a junior senator on the campaign promises of "hope and change" "fundamentally transforming america" "changing the way the world looks at america", among other thoughtless platitudes, joke about the potential unfulfilled campaign promises and rhetoric of trump. I mean, michele told everyone there is no hope, our foreign policy is an undeniable dumpster conflagration, our domestic policy is completely incoherent mess save for his signature accomplishment, which is such a disaster that it is going to be repealed in about 8 weeks time.

Nobody has promised more and delivered less than obama. His entire party is a shell of itself, having lost 1300+ congressional seats nationwide, over a dozen governorships and all 3 branches of the federal government.  His promises were so flowery and grandiose that those who bought off on them can be best characterized as totally rough ridin' delusional or objectively insane. Trump supporters were at least  buying off on something tangible, making them infinitely smarter than b.o. supporters.

You just have to laugh at how clueless these people are. It's winter in libtard land and they're still dressed in men's capris and fitted tanks.

[Fake Sugar Dick (WARNING, NOT THE REAL SUGAR DICK!)]

Cruz might have even lost TX to Obama under SD's scenario.

Yeah, on opposite day.

What a Fake Sugar Dick (WARNING, NOT THE REAL SUGAR DICK!)

[Rage Against the McKee]

I'm not sure if Cruz would have been able to beat Clinton.

[gatoveintisiete]

Donald was the only 'pub that could have won and ironically the media got him nominated (on purpose)
 

[420seriouscat69]

Donald was the only 'pub that could have won and ironically the media got him nominated (on purpose)
 

The best thing by the media by far in 2016 was them automatically lol at him and not accepting him as a serious candidate. Millennials are obviously lazy, but they really took the cake on this one.

[K-S-U-Wildcats!]

There's some truth to that quote but if you don't take him at his word, what on earth are you voting for?  It's mind blowing to me that a candidate can say "I'm going to build a wall and make Mexico pay for it" and have no expectations that he is going to try to build a wall and have Mexico pay for it.  I don't know how people could vote for a guy and then go "Well he wasn't being serious when he said these things but was serious when he said the things that I like."

All of this isn't a knock on Trump voters, but an effort to understand.  Post-election Chicat's belief is still that Trump is a terrible candidate/future president but that the Democrats somehow did EVEN WORSE.

Do you remember "we're gonna create or SAVE a gazzillion jobs" or "if you like your health insurance policy you can keep it, this is not a tax, and premiums will go down by $2200 a year!"  This stuff was never going to be true but Mexico will pay for the wall. 

It's quite amusing to watch a group of people who elected a junior senator on the campaign promises of "hope and change" "fundamentally transforming america" "changing the way the world looks at america", among other thoughtless platitudes, joke about the potential unfulfilled campaign promises and rhetoric of trump. I mean, michele told everyone there is no hope, our foreign policy is an undeniable dumpster conflagration, our domestic policy is completely incoherent mess save for his signature accomplishment, which is such a disaster that it is going to be repealed in about 8 weeks time.

Nobody has promised more and delivered less than obama. His entire party is a shell of itself, having lost 1300+ congressional seats nationwide, over a dozen governorships and all 3 branches of the federal government.  His promises were so flowery and grandiose that those who bought off on them can be best characterized as totally rough ridin' delusional or objectively insane. Trump supporters were at least  buying off on something tangible, making them infinitely smarter than b.o. supporters.

You just have to laugh at how clueless these people are. It's winter in libtard land and they're still dressed in men's capris and fitted tanks.

There should be an FSD Gems thread, and this should be in it. The libs would eff it up tho.

[Rage Against the McKee]

Donald was the only 'pub that could have won and ironically the media got him nominated (on purpose)
 

Oh, I think just about any of the republicans would have had a very good chance.

[gatoveintisiete]

Donald was the only 'pub that could have won and ironically the media got him nominated (on purpose)
 

Oh, I think just about any of the republicans would have had a very good chance.

Pretty sure you're wrong, D's have the benefit of the media, R's have the benefit of principle although some lose their way.  D's are not dogpiled by the media unless the person is cut loose so to speak by the party and this generally only happens if it benefits more powerful D's.  On the other side R's are attacked
Rabidly by the Demedia duo and if the charges have any merit the principled R's rollover on the culprit after he is forced to apologize for his transgression.  Donald is the only R in my lifetime that has got down in the mud and fought like a D, he will not retreat, he won't apologize even in the face of his own party calling for it.  That is what made it possible for him to take down both parties and the media and lol at the idea that any of those other pussies could have done it.

I'm not happy that it has to be done that way, I prefer a more forthright approach but playing fair in national us politics on the right gets you beat.

[Kat Kid]

There's some truth to that quote but if you don't take him at his word, what on earth are you voting for?  It's mind blowing to me that a candidate can say "I'm going to build a wall and make Mexico pay for it" and have no expectations that he is going to try to build a wall and have Mexico pay for it.  I don't know how people could vote for a guy and then go "Well he wasn't being serious when he said these things but was serious when he said the things that I like."

All of this isn't a knock on Trump voters, but an effort to understand.  Post-election Chicat's belief is still that Trump is a terrible candidate/future president but that the Democrats somehow did EVEN WORSE.

You should watch Adam Curtis' Hypernormalisation.

It talks about this as being "in the zone."  It means that everyone accepts that the world around them is full of lying and things are unreal, but they have no alternative and because it is so enmeshed in their lives, they experience it and participate in it so they accept this state of being as normal.  "The zone" comes from a Russian book and film that was an allegory to living in the USSR as it began to collapse and everyone knew it but didn't really change their daily routines.

[Phil Titola]

Has anyone seen DJT birth certificate?

[star seed 7]

Has anyone seen DJT birth certificate?

When asked to release it his spokesman said it was a "ridiculous" request

[Phil Titola]

Prob embarrassed he was a chubby baby

[CNS]

His mom was really the cleaning lady.

[chum1]

Trump supporters understand that they're not buying a house, but rather a lifestyle.

Trump adviser: Don't take Trump literally, 'take him symbolically'

http://www.politico.com/story/2016/12/trump-symbolically-anthony-scaramucci-232848

[star seed 7]

lol

[chum1]

You're not actually any safer. You will feel safer, though. Have you heard about Mad Dog!?

[Phil Titola]

Not taking a candidate for serious on what they say during the campaign may be the dumbest excuse I've ever heard.

[Dugout DickStone]

Not taking a candidate for serious on what they say during the campaign may be the dumbest excuse I've ever heard.

It makes perfect sense.  Trump isn't going to do several things his voters specifically wanted but rather than appear duped like suckers they get to say "we didn't take him literally"

[K-S-U-Wildcats!]

Ok so I guess you guys wwrent happy with the real explanation I have you, and would prefer to just believe Trump's supporters are irrational morons. Enjoy your cocoons.

[star seed 7]

Well yeah, trump voters are irrational morons