Trumpism discussion

[Second Summer]

Welcome to the highbrow discussion about Trumpism, i.e. a discussion that isn't about mocking and making fun of Trump or his supporters, or about anti-Trump activism, but rather, in an as objective and detached way as possible investigates topics such as e.g.

• the reasons behind his popular support
• the likely consequences of his policies, both positive and negative
• the political relationship between the Trump administration and Russia
  
• Russian intelligence agencies' influence in the election
  
• to what extent the Trump administration can be said to be fascist
• what alternative political labels may be more fitting
• likely future influence and direction of Trumpism
• similar political phenomena, past or present

Please try to back up any not-so-self-evident or disputed claims with authoritative sources.

(The moderators will attempt to keep a vigilant eye on this thread to make sure the discussion remains highbrow, peaceful and on-topic. Posts that are not up to standards will be deleted / edited, and troublemakers will be evicted from the thread.)

 

[Andy_T]

This article was published 3 weeks ago and has already been discussed on the other thread a bit, but I think it makes a good starting point for a "highbrow" discussion:
Trump supporters see a successful president — and are frustrated with critics who don’t

 

[KLS52]

Trump supporters see a successful president — and are frustrated with critics who don’t

Reading this makes me feel more hopeless. I'm definitely gaining insight as to why his supporters feel the way they do and sometimes, in really weak moments, though they are far and few between, I feel like maybe I'm on the wrong side. But then the reality and fear kick in and I come back to, what I believe, to be my senses.

I'm not sure I'm capable of having a highbrow discussion, haha...like, does everything have to be "supposed facts" we read and hear, with sources, because I think what I just posted is more "feeling" related. I can attest that they are not "fake" feelings. So maybe I should stick to the other thread. I'm very interested to see how this goes.

ETA: Nevermind...I just googled the word "highbrow". Oops!!

 

[Moll Flanders]

Dow soars 300 points, closes above 21,000 for the first time - Mar. 1, 2017 One positive (depending on your perspective) is that the Dow closed above 21,000 after Trump's speech. However, I have read that some think the Dow wasn't related to the speech.Here’s the real reason behind Dow 21,000 (no, it’s not Trump's speech) - MarketWatch

I said on the other thread that the speech to Congress was the first coherent speech I have ever seen him make. I'm hoping that means he will calm down and stop tweeting so much. ETA - I just saw this, maybe not! Donald Trump claims Barack Obama ordered 'wire tap' on Trump Tower, but provides no evidence | The Independent

 

[ledboots]

I think a major reason that Trump has a base is the economic stagnation in the US for the working and middle class.

Americans want to give their children a better life than they themselves had, and in many of the so-called red states, they see the next generation burdened with student loan debt to the government, with educations that do not produce the earning potential they should, unable to buy a starter home or even a decent car. Rents are sky-high after the banks seized so many homes in the mortgage scam and investors snapped them up. Food and housing costs have gone up faster than wages have, and more and more working people need government assistance for food, shelter, and healthcare. The gap between the rich and everyone else has widened. Trump succeeded in giving this part of the electorate hope that there would be change for them.

 

[KLS52]

I think a major reason that Trump has a base is the economic stagnation in the US for the working and middle class.

Americans want to give their children a better life than they themselves had, and in many of the so-called red states, they see the next generation burdened with student loan debt to the government, with educations that do not produce the earning potential they should, unable to buy a starter home or even a decent car. Rents are sky-high after the banks seized so many homes in the mortgage scam and investors snapped them up. Food and housing costs have gone up faster than wages have, and more and more working people need government assistance for food, shelter, and healthcare. The gap between the rich and everyone else has widened. Trump succeeded in giving this part of the electorate hope that there would be change for them.

Thank you, ledboots. This is what I've been hearing. I'm not sure I understand what it is about Donald Trump that makes people believe he can do this. Is it because he has succeeded in making so much money for himself? Will the end justify the means?

 

[Andy_T]

and more and more working people need government assistance for food, shelter, and healthcare. The gap between the rich and everyone else has widened.

I am also flabbergasted by the fact that - while these are very real concerns, that are unfortunately not easily remedied - so many people believe that electing a billionaire who has vowed to cut government assistance and remove controls on financial institutions will help them.

Now that he has presented his first budget ideas, with 50 billion additional funding earmarked to further improve the US military (which is already, by far, the strongest military on the planet) and raising that money mainly by cutting other budgets, what do those people think about that?

And are the "average people" happy if repealing Obamacare might mean that they get a yearly reduction of 1,000$ on their health plan, (200,000$ reduction per year for the 1% of super rich), while the people with lower income or worse health will either lose their coverage again or have the cost substantially increased? Surely people should not be that selfish.

 

[Moll Flanders]

The Peculiar Populism of Donald Trump - The New York Times

The populism angle fascinates me as we have seen a similar reaction from people with Brexit in the UK. I was hoping that the populism would fizzle out, as (to me) populists offer simple answers to complex issues, but it is affecting other parts of Europe too. I think it is both economic and cultural issues driving the populism.

I think a major reason that Trump has a base is the economic stagnation in the US for the working and middle class.

Trump succeeded in giving this part of the electorate hope that there would be change for them.

I think you are right. I agree with Andy and KLS52 as well as I am not sure how DT will be able to help this group of people, or if he really wants to. I think he managed to tap into the frustration in your country and give them a different solution to the one the Democrats were offering.

 

[beancounter]

Trump signs order to begin rolling back Wall Street regulations

Trump Begins to Chip Away at Banking Regulations

This is fairly old news, and I posted it in the other thread, but I think it's important.The biggest change that will impact Main Street, is the elimination of "Fiduciary rule". This is the rule that requires investment advisers to act in the best interest of their clients. At best, it has the potential to reduce retirement savings. At worse, it could leave people with none.

It doesn't just impact individuals though. Small businesses setting up a 401K plan for their employees, may get duped by an adviser pushing bad mutual funds. Over the course of my career, I've worked for two companies that had plans that were bleeding value at a time when the stock market was on an upward trend.

There are numerous other provisions under the chopping block that would make it easier for Wall Street firms to go back to the behaviors they engaged in prior to Dodd-Frank. It's quite possible we could see another collapse.

 

[Andy_T]

.The biggest change that will impact Main Street, is the elimination of "Fiduciary rule". This is the rule that requires investment advisers to act in the best interest of their clients.

I am interested how the GOP arguments to their voters why this rule needs to be eliminated. (And even more how the majority of their voters who are NOT financial scammers would think it to be a good idea)

 

[Spang]

I am interested how the GOP arguments to their voters why this rule needs to be eliminated. (And even more how the majority of their voters who are NOT financial scammers would think it to be a good idea)

Racism.

Since the days of slavery, wealthy white people have been using racism to divide working-class white people from working-class people of color, and gettng said white people to vote against their interests. Jonna Ivin wrote a great piece about all that here.

 

[Second Summer]

The FBI Director has refuted suggestions by President Trump that Barack Obama had his wires tapped, according to US media reports.

James Comey has asked the US Justice Department to publicly refute Mr Trump's accusations - a move which questions the President's truthfulness.

More: FBI director rejects Trump's wiretap claims (6. March 2017)

James Comey was appointed to deputy attorney general under president G.W. Bush, and FBI director in 2013 by president Obama. He was until recently (2016) a registered Republican voter, now independent.

This raises questions about why Trump is making these accusations. It does seem like a very obvious attempt to deflect negative media attention to his own administration's connections with Russian diplomats and intelligence agencies.

 

[Andy_T]

Since the days of slavery, wealthy white people have been using racism to divide working-class white people from working-class people of color, and gettng said white people to vote against their interests.

Spang, I understand all that, but it still does not answer my question "How to explain to a 'normal' person that it is a bad thing to have a law that requires an investment advisor to put the best interests of his customers first" ... especially as this law has been implemented after 'normal people' were screwed over by financial advisors, time and again...

 

[Moll Flanders]

I read something yesterday in the FT about Trump and the "bait and switch" technique. I remember reading this before as some American people on a forum were saying that is the marketing technique that Donald Trump uses to draw people in. I wasn't familiar with the expression, but it seems accurate.

Andrew Sullivan: Our President’s Emotional Bait and Switch
Trump's Bait-and-Switch Presidency - The Atlantic

This raises questions about why Trump is making these accusations. It does seem like a very obvious attempt to deflect negative media attention to his own administration's connections with Russian diplomats and intelligence agencies.

I assumed that was the reason. I was watching a programme where the presenter was reading the tweets out loud and it really is quite unbelievable that a president would be acting in this way. There are some Italian people on a forum I'm on and they have compared him to Berlusconi.

 

[Andy_T]

Jonna Ivin wrote a great piece about all that here.

Very interesting opinion piece, thank you for sharing!

 

[Andy_T]

One aspect of trumpism that I am very concerned about is the whole "fake news" part.
Not just the wrong claims that he keeps making at will, without any foundation or sources, and often against his own better knowledge, but the part where he declares the media to be "the enemy" or "fake news" ... and the fact that his supporters seem to lap that up without critical review.

When he was elected, I was, of course, not happy, but I thought that the problem would not last very long, as his supporters would likely quickly become disillusioned once it became clear he can not deliver on any of his "promises" (replace Obamacare with "something better", "bring back jobs" and so on).

But, it seems, he can continue to claim things and his supporters will believe him over anything else they hear.

A good example of that is the following

Conservative activists refuse to believe Trump is spending more on travel than Obama

Some examples from that article (emphasis by me):

Similarly, Arthur Herstein, 74, a writer from Bowie, Maryland, said he was frustrated by Obama’s “over-the-top” vacation and travel expenses.

Still, Herstein said he doesn’t believe it’s the case that Trump is on pace to spend more on vacation and travel. He waved away a Washington Post story held up on a reporter’s phone.

“I believe that the story exists,” Herstein said. “But the facts in it can’t possibly be right. That absolutely can’t be right. How did Trump spend $10 million in one month and Obama spent $11 million in a year? It defies logic.”

It goes even further ... if the information is presented by political institutions, and even confirmed by Republican politicians, there is still the notion that it's "the establishment trying to pin something on him".

Of course, the idea that Trump and his supporters are frustrated by the media is nothing new. But some CPAC attendees’ distrust of even government institutions ran strikingly deep.

“I don’t trust the bookkeepers. I don’t trust the people who say, ‘This president spent X and this president spent Y,’” said Roy Postel, 58, a real estate developer from near Chicago. “The whole bureaucracy is against Trump, so I’d like to know who is getting greased to tell us what Obama spent. I wouldn’t trust anyone with an estimate of what the Trump administration has spent on travel.”

 

[Mischief]

But, it seems, he can continue to claim things and his supporters will believe him over anything else they hear.

A good example of that is the following

Conservative activists refuse to believe Trump is spending more on travel than Obama

Some examples from that article (emphasis by me):



It goes even further ... if the information is presented by political institutions, and even confirmed by Republican politicians, there is still the notion that it's "the establishment trying to pin something on him".

The sad thing is, it doesn't even take believing in reports to realize that dt is spending far more on personal travel than Obama. You just have to look at the fact that he's already spent four weekends since the inauguration at his Florida resort, and common sense should prevail.

With dt supporters, it's a case of the old question, "Who are you going to believe, me or your own lying eyes?"

That was true during the campaign, and it continues to be true.

 

[Andy_T]

With dt supporters, it's a case of the old question, "Who are you going to believe, me or your own lying eyes?"

I agree, that about nails it....

 

[Second Summer]

More in-depth article about Trump's wiretapping accusations:

In a Nov. 7, 2016, article, Heat Street wrote that the FBI on two occasions sought a warrant from the Foreign Intelligence Surveillance Court, or FISA court, as part of its investigation of Russia’s interference in the U.S. presidential election, and Trump associates who were suspected of contacts with Russian officials.
Heat Street reported that the FBI failed in June to obtain a warrant, but it was successful in October after the request was narrowed to focus on possible “financial and banking offenses” involving two Russian banks:

Examining Trump’s Wiretap Claim (6. March 2017)

The important thing to note is that president Obama would have had no involvement in FBI's activities.

 

[beancounter]

Mod Post: Please keep in mind that the Trumpism thread is for high brow discussion. Articles, especially opinion articles, that are designed to evoke strong emotions in the reader, are not appropriate for this thread. Please post those types of articles in the other Trump thread.