|
tamaka -> RE: I have the answer! (1/28/2017 6:03:28 PM)
|
quote:
ORIGINAL: Musicmystery
quote:
ORIGINAL: dcnovice
quote:
ORIGINAL: Musicmystery
The thing is -- Trump is a symptom. What happened to scoop out those who helped get him there?
Three quarters of the way through a thoughtful reply to this, my wretched craptop went into a coma (#pcssuck). I'll try to recreate it.
First, we need to bear in mind that 11 million more Americans voted against Trump than for him. Three million of those votes went to Hillary Clinton, the rest to other candidates (largely Johnson and Stein). Yes, I know that's electorally irrelevant, but it speaks to what folks actually wanted.
That said, I think several other factors were important:
(a) At a time when many voters disdain politicians as packaged, elitist, and self-interested, Trump came across as unvarnished and able to give voice to folks' frustrations. Ditto for Bernie Sanders across the aisle.
(b) No one, that I know of anyway, has found a way for the U.S. to reap the genuine benefits of globalization without inflicting massive pain on countless people and communities. For those who feel--who are--left behind, pulling back into the turtle shell is an understandable response.
(c) From crafting to passage to implementation, the ACA--which does have its merits--was a textbook case in how to convince the populace that government is not merely inept but in the pockets of big money. It didn't help that parliamentary maneuvering and the chief justice's (almost certainly) results-driven opinion underscored the sense that "Washington" was pulling one over on us.
(d) The Obama administration didn't always instill confidence that it had foreign policy in hand. A particular problem is that those of us on the left have not managed the brutally tough balancing act of condemning Islamic fanaticism and convincing Americans that we can protect them from it without stereotyping a billion diverse people, many of whose support we need to actually address the issue in the real world.
(e) Probably unconsciously, people may have been reluctant to follow one barrier-breaking presidency with another.
(f) As with the Brexit referendum, some citizens may have cast protest votes, tacitly assuming that others would keep the car on the road.
These are all unscientific impressions, but they may be grist for thought.
Thanks for sharing this, dc. I was wondering about (e) myself, including the unawareness.
Yes a little more of that kind of thinking and we'll have to let people pee in public on fire hydrants and crap on their neighbor's front lawn because even though they are in a human body, they really feel deep inside that they are a dog. And then of course, sex with a dog would have to be legalized too.
|
|
|
|
