I just can't figure out what the hell Trump is doing

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:The media narrative on Trump is way overdone and inaccurate. The MSM thinks they have a pass to editorialize on Trump rather than report facts in an un-biased way. And it is all for ratings. It makes me want to defend Trump because he is being treated unfairly. Mostly-liberal here.

I am in the same boat - liberal on most issues but I find myself defending Trump occasionally because the media is so biased against him.

The only thing Trump got going for him is voters. I hope he can weather the attacks in the next 100 days. The Clinton machine is well oiled.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:I think the reality is that we are in a huge period of social change on par with the Civil Rights movement of the 1960's, only this time it is on a global scale. Demographics and social mores are changing at an extremely rapid pace. Global trade and communication are changing our economies and our relationship to the entire human race at an extremely rapid pace. The internet had rendered truth relative. There is way too much information available and too little ability to make sense of it. From a psychological perspective all of this change is challenging, and many people all over the world are proving incapable of handling it. It is much easier to keep the other out, to maintain the long-held status quo, so the world is simpler and easier to understand. Look at Brexit. Look at the rise of far-right movements in France, Germany, Poland, Hungary. They are all based on nationalism and keeping out the "other." Trump has an instinct for all of this and has tapped into people here who are feeling the same thing. They want a strongman. They want someone to tell them it is all going to be okay. That's what he's doing. It doesn't matter if the result is that the people being "otherized" are motivated to retaliate.

This entire dynamic is terrifying and I don't see an end in sight. With each passing day I am trying to wrap my head around the reality of Trump as President, because I honestly do think we are repeating the cycle of the early 20th century all over again.

I agree with your reading of the larger dynamics in play. What gives me hope, though, is that America is not Europe. Europe has constantly struggled with xenophobia and nationalism. The only thing that stabilized it was several huge wars and rounds of ethnic cleansing. It is intensely tribal and regional at heart. Thus the tension with the EU.

America has many of the same issues and several others besides, but we are a nation of immigrants and incorrigible optimists. In the end, this election will be a struggle but there are still many people who believe in the possibility of living with diversity. There are still many people who believe in the possibility of the future and in our innovation, our education system, our superior human capital. The narrative of American exceptionalism is no doubt problematic but as you saw at the DNC last week it remains powerful and moving. I think we will see the ship in safely... Don't give up yet!

Also the economy here, though not great, has been much better than Europe.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:With the Khan episode though, Trump has finally crossed a line of decency and propriety even with the low bar set in this election. I cannot recall another instance where there was near-universal condemnation of a candidate. The Republicans usually march in lockstep behind their nominee.

His base is loving it, I'm sure, since they share his biases against Muslims.

Too true. But the comments about the mother, who then went on national TV to implore Mr Trump to feel her pain, are in tension with their worldview. Strong men don't need to attack women and they certainly don't need to cause greater pain to grieving mothers.

I think he picked the wrong battle here, to be honest. Khan is from a culture of honor and strength as well. He hits Trump where it hurts -- on his leadership, his citizenship, his character. Plus the family has the clear moral high ground. It's very effective. Trump is frightened and therefore became nasty.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:I think the reality is that we are in a huge period of social change on par with the Civil Rights movement of the 1960's, only this time it is on a global scale. Demographics and social mores are changing at an extremely rapid pace. Global trade and communication are changing our economies and our relationship to the entire human race at an extremely rapid pace. The internet had rendered truth relative. There is way too much information available and too little ability to make sense of it. From a psychological perspective all of this change is challenging, and many people all over the world are proving incapable of handling it. It is much easier to keep the other out, to maintain the long-held status quo, so the world is simpler and easier to understand. Look at Brexit. Look at the rise of far-right movements in France, Germany, Poland, Hungary. They are all based on nationalism and keeping out the "other." Trump has an instinct for all of this and has tapped into people here who are feeling the same thing. They want a strongman. They want someone to tell them it is all going to be okay. That's what he's doing. It doesn't matter if the result is that the people being "otherized" are motivated to retaliate.

This entire dynamic is terrifying and I don't see an end in sight. With each passing day I am trying to wrap my head around the reality of Trump as President, because I honestly do think we are repeating the cycle of the early 20th century all over again.

I agree with your reading of the larger dynamics in play. What gives me hope, though, is that America is not Europe. Europe has constantly struggled with xenophobia and nationalism. The only thing that stabilized it was several huge wars and rounds of ethnic cleansing. It is intensely tribal and regional at heart. Thus the tension with the EU.

America has many of the same issues and several others besides, but we are a nation of immigrants and incorrigible optimists. In the end, this election will be a struggle but there are still many people who believe in the possibility of living with diversity. There are still many people who believe in the possibility of the future and in our innovation, our education system, our superior human capital. The narrative of American exceptionalism is no doubt problematic but as you saw at the DNC last week it remains powerful and moving. I think we will see the ship in safely... Don't give up yet!

Also the economy here, though not great, has been much better than Europe.

Exactly. Gas is $1.95 a gallon at my local gas station today. We're far from a revolution, on the contrary we have much to lose.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:The media narrative on Trump is way overdone and inaccurate. The MSM thinks they have a pass to editorialize on Trump rather than report facts in an un-biased way. And it is all for ratings. It makes me want to defend Trump because he is being treated unfairly. Mostly-liberal here.

I am in the same boat - liberal on most issues but I find myself defending Trump occasionally because the media is so biased against him.

Please someone enumerate the media Bias for me...I usually read the interviews and speeches transcript and evaluate myself. But may be I am missing something.

Yeah, really. This reminds me of when all the guys on the Bachelorette last season hated Chad because he was a violent, angry bully. And he kept whining about how everyone was ganging up on him, but had no insight into why.

Actually, Chad's only friend in the house compared him to Hitler, Mussolini, and Trump. So maybe this analogy is apt on more than one level.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:With the Khan episode though, Trump has finally crossed a line of decency and propriety even with the low bar set in this election. I cannot recall another instance where there was near-universal condemnation of a candidate. The Republicans usually march in lockstep behind their nominee.

His base is loving it, I'm sure, since they share his biases against terrorists.

Fify

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Which is the most terrifying part of this election.

And no low is too low-there is still a defense or excuse

Could this be because there are Americans who feel they have been taken for a ride by establishment politicians from both parties over the last several decades?

For example, the trade deals were sold as creating millions of new jobs in the US. What we have seen is the decimation of manufacturing jobs in the US.

Have the chickens come home to roost?

Jobs have been created for those with degrees as unemployment for that segment is less than 3%. But those that are affected are disproportionately "poorly educated". They have not lost as many jobs to mexicans as they have to machines. Today cars are made by machines. manufacturing can go from CAD/CAM design engineers to finished product without much human involvement. Computers do the machining based on specs and errors are very low with the elimination of human error. I went to a winery for wine tasting and the entire winery was run with 10 people. The same winery had 50 people 2 years back according to the tour guide. It was basically, sensors, machines and computers running the whole shop.

No amount of blaming trade deals will stop machines from taking over. Soon there are driverless cars that will kill truckers income. We are entering the age of the machines and our 20th century thinking will not solve our 21st century problems. There has to be better income distribution, retraining, a guaranteed basic income and other novel ideas.

[Anonymous]

I'd like to know -- precisely and exactly -- what it was that Trump said about Khan that was so offensive.

As I understand it, this all started when he simply said that maybe the mother wasn't allowed to speak at the convention. Is there more to it than that? What am I missing?

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:The media narrative on Trump is way overdone and inaccurate. The MSM thinks they have a pass to editorialize on Trump rather than report facts in an un-biased way. And it is all for ratings. It makes me want to defend Trump because he is being treated unfairly. Mostly-liberal here.

I am in the same boat - liberal on most issues but I find myself defending Trump occasionally because the media is so biased against him.

The only thing Trump got going for him is low information, blue collar white votersvoters. I hope he can weather the attacks in the next 100 days. The Clinton machine is well oiled.

Fixed it for you.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:
Too true. But the comments about the mother, who then went on national TV to implore Mr Trump to feel her pain, are in tension with their worldview. Strong men don't need to attack women and they certainly don't need to cause greater pain to grieving mothers.

I think he picked the wrong battle here, to be honest. Khan is from a culture of honor and strength as well. He hits Trump where it hurts -- on his leadership, his citizenship, his character. Plus the family has the clear moral high ground. It's very effective. Trump is frightened and therefore became nasty.

Quite honestly, I know of several people who are not racist, not anti-immigrant, not anti-Muslim who had the same reaction about Mrs Khan not saying a word when her husband was talking. They assumed it was cultural although they did not feel a need to disparage her because she did not talk.

Having had a fair amount of interaction with Muslims from different countries both here as well as in their own countries there is a strong sense of family and so Trump's comments about Mrs Khan would have evoked a certain feeling of revulsion especially since Trump was pretty explicit in suggesting that she was not allowed to talk.

The Khan parents are originally from Pakistan and, again, in the context of society there, the husband would probably be the main spokesperson in a situation like this.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:I'd like to know -- precisely and exactly -- what it was that Trump said about Khan that was so offensive.

As I understand it, this all started when he simply said that maybe the mother wasn't allowed to speak at the convention. Is there more to it than that? What am I missing?

Trump said Khan had "no right" to speak of Trump as he did. Really? What is this, a f*ing dictatorship? Last I heard, the point of democracy is that people can publicly criticize their leaders and engage in free discourse about elections.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:I'd like to know -- precisely and exactly -- what it was that Trump said about Khan that was so offensive.

As I understand it, this all started when he simply said that maybe the mother wasn't allowed to speak at the convention. Is there more to it than that? What am I missing?

I think I read somewhere that Trump is upset that Khan based his speech on an episode of My Little Pony.

[jsteele]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:I'd like to know -- precisely and exactly -- what it was that Trump said about Khan that was so offensive.

As I understand it, this all started when he simply said that maybe the mother wasn't allowed to speak at the convention. Is there more to it than that? What am I missing?

Trump said Khan had "no right" to speak of Trump as he did. Really? What is this, a f*ing dictatorship? Last I heard, the point of democracy is that people can publicly criticize their leaders and engage in free discourse about elections.

Clearly Trump doesn't know that Khan has a right to speak because he hasn't had a chance to borrow Khan's copy of the US Constitution and, as a result, it still unfamiliar with its contents.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:
Too true. But the comments about the mother, who then went on national TV to implore Mr Trump to feel her pain, are in tension with their worldview. Strong men don't need to attack women and they certainly don't need to cause greater pain to grieving mothers.

I think he picked the wrong battle here, to be honest. Khan is from a culture of honor and strength as well. He hits Trump where it hurts -- on his leadership, his citizenship, his character. Plus the family has the clear moral high ground. It's very effective. Trump is frightened and therefore became nasty.

Quite honestly, I know of several people who are not racist, not anti-immigrant, not anti-Muslim who had the same reaction about Mrs Khan not saying a word when her husband was talking. They assumed it was cultural although they did not feel a need to disparage her because she did not talk.

Having had a fair amount of interaction with Muslims from different countries both here as well as in their own countries there is a strong sense of family and so Trump's comments about Mrs Khan would have evoked a certain feeling of revulsion especially since Trump was pretty explicit in suggesting that she was not allowed to talk.

The Khan parents are originally from Pakistan and, again, in the context of society there, the husband would probably be the main spokesperson in a situation like this.

Not sure who your friends are, but that is silly. I have a lot of very outspoken female Pakistan journalist friends. And clearly if it was that oppressive, why would she even be on stage? Why would she show her face and some of her hair? Just stupid.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:I'd like to know -- precisely and exactly -- what it was that Trump said about Khan that was so offensive.

As I understand it, this all started when he simply said that maybe the mother wasn't allowed to speak at the convention. Is there more to it than that? What am I missing?

I think the most offensive thing was when he was asked what he had sacrificed for the country, he said he sacrificed by working hard and creating jobs. This insulted not just the Khans, but every family that has lost someone in a war. Then Trump being Trump, rather than either ignoring or admitted the error, continued the attacks.