Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
It was not complicated how Trump won. You did not have to listen to Victor Hanson. Trump praised Americans, he honored our soldiers, he honored our police officers, he honored our firefighters and he honored the average working man. He gave us credit for our accomplishments; what else did he need?
The left never figured that out. Hillary had all the money in the world and could not win. We were toys to be used for a vote. Once we voted they did not care; they were not on our side.
Hillary and the left played right into his hand when she and her supporters put us down. Deplorable became a badge of honor; not an insult to turn us into left, goose-stepping, lemmings. The left never saw that; they still don't. They think that insulting voters turn voters to the other side - it does not work that way. I am proud that I worked hard to support my family. I was proud that I did stinky, sweaty, bloody, backbreaking work. If that made me a deplorable; so be it!
fisheye...you forgot President Trump knew where to campaign. Key to leadership. Know where to put your focus.
I agree that he had a smart campaign. He turned his back where he did not have the support. But his message is what sold him. We heard so many stories about how Hillary could not stand her body guards and she did not like to rub shoulders with the voters. She was aloof; while Trump went down in the pits. They were totally different campaigns. Hillary expected to win so much that she took the voters for granted. We all know what happens when we assume!
... I am proud that I worked hard to support my family. I was proud that I did stinky, sweaty, bloody, backbreaking work. If that made me a deplorable; so be it!
Your pride isn't to be gainsaid. But what about the person who chose to take the academic route in high-school, then college, then grad school, and settled into an office-career? Is such a person less valuable, less sincere, less upstanding, less worthy? What about the person who chose not to have a family, instead devoting himself or herself to some other pursuit? Is such a person, again, somehow inferior?
The narrative of the 2016 election was the working-class family-person. Fine. It's only fair, that such people should not be downtrodden, demeaned or ignored. But what about others? Should they in turn be marginalized, as being effete, frumpy, snobbish or phony?
Your pride isn't to be gainsaid. But what about the person who chose to take the academic route in high-school, then college, then grad school, and settled into an office-career? Is such a person less valuable, less sincere, less upstanding, less worthy? What about the person who chose not to have a family, instead devoting himself or herself to some other pursuit? Is such a person, again, somehow inferior?
The narrative of the 2016 election was the working-class family-person. Fine. It's only fair, that such people should not be downtrodden, demeaned or ignored. But what about others? Should they in turn be marginalized, as being effete, frumpy, snobbish or phony?
We worked hard so that our child could go on to get his PHD. So what is your argument? We all want better for our kids. Does that mean that we don't count?
Like I said before: Hillary was aloof. Who did she mix with other than more leaders. She showed no affinity for any except the ruling class. Trump was down in the pits and shook just about any hand in his direction. It did not matter if they had the PHD, blue collar or no collar.
I spent most of my life, about forty years, as a Democrat. I spent some years as an Independent and I have only been a Republican for long enough to vote for Trump and watch the 'change' happen. This is what I wanted; I wanted somebody to go in there and shake things up. Too many years average workers were denied raises or barely received a cost of living adjustment.
Almost all the politicians say they want to end the lobbyist in Washington; but none ever follows through. It is all talk until they get elected. We needed an outsider in DC. A businessman that had not gone through Harvard was a good choice. Perhaps he will never change the existing system. But it is interesting to see his brand of government like the canceling of the Congressional diner the other day: https://ijr.com/2018/06/1105305-cong...o-walter-reed/.
We worked hard so that our child could go on to get his PHD. So what is your argument? We all want better for our kids. Does that mean that we don't count?
The argument is that it's a false and duplicitous narrative, to insinuate that the blue-collar voter is somehow more genuine, more earthy, more deserving than the cubicle-dweller. Of course you count; but so do your kids, who have PhDs and perhaps never had occasion to wield a sickle or a hammer; so does the other fellow, who maybe never had kids. The point is that we keep hearing working-class this, and working-class that, as if the "non-working class" (who ever that is) are a bunch of snooty charlatans, who finally got their comeuppance.
Once upon a time, the meaning of "conservative" was someone who believed that sudden and drastic change, even if well-intended and perhaps sorely necessary, was overwhelmingly likely to be mistaken. Why? Because even perfidious and evil systems reach an equilibrium, where things more or less work. To break them, even for sincere and legitimate reasons, causes havoc... unintended and unforeseen consequences. This is why "hope and change" was a bad idea in 2008, and again a bad idea in 2016. The difference is, that in 2009, the promised change was largely empty rhetoric - to the relief of many of us. Today, the promised change is actually happening - to the dejection and horror of many of us.
The argument is that it's a false and duplicitous narrative, to insinuate that the blue-collar voter is somehow more genuine, more earthy, more deserving than the cubicle-dweller. Of course you count; but so do your kids, who have PhDs and perhaps never had occasion to wield a sickle or a hammer; so does the other fellow, who maybe never had kids. The point is that we keep hearing working-class this, and working-class that, as if the "non-working class" (who ever that is) are a bunch of snooty charlatans, who finally got their comeuppance.
Once upon a time, the meaning of "conservative" was someone who believed that sudden and drastic change, even if well-intended and perhaps sorely necessary, was overwhelmingly likely to be mistaken. Why? Because even perfidious and evil systems reach an equilibrium, where things more or less work. To break them, even for sincere and legitimate reasons, causes havoc... unintended and unforeseen consequences. This is why "hope and change" was a bad idea in 2008, and again a bad idea in 2016. The difference is, that in 2009, the promised change was largely empty rhetoric - to the relief of many of us. Today, the promised change is actually happening - to the dejection and horror of many of us.
Why are you turning this into a class warfare? If anything our teachers stood solid against Trump. There were some that did have a higher education that supported Trump. Trump worked the crowds; regardless of economic 'class'. Hillary did not have a message other than: I am a woman and I am entitled! I have already said this several times: She was aloof. She was not in touch with the average voter.
That is the problem with the current Democratic Party. It is like our poll that was just started on CD and about 70% said they were against illegal immigration. But, mainly Democrats, want open borders. Even if the figures were 50/50; you should be willing to compromise for a better America - but you will not. Your quest to sit around the camp fire is too great. Unfortunately sitting around the campfire is no longer singing kumbaya; you now want to roast conservatives (even in your own Party). We keep asking: What do you stand for and you can hear a pin drop - other than your resounding "I hate Trump"! Just show us that you do believe in a better America and you would be on the road to true Party reform.
Joe Biden would have mopped the floor with Donald Trump. The truth of the matter is that Hillary Clinton was a historically awful candidate. Wooden, indecisive, terrible campaign management, lots of skeevy things in her past, lying to Congress, and a host of other things.
You know when I knew the election was over? April, 2016, when Hillary Clinton talked about putting coal miners out of work. Mind you, that statement was taken out of context with the larger conversation being about job programs. But it was said in a really ham-handed and tone-deaf way. When I watched her say that, I thought, "Well, there goes Pennsylvania, West Virginia, and Ohio." I predicted as much to my friends. They thought I was nuts until November.
Here's the thing. At the end of the day, people kept yapping about how qualified Hillary Clinton was. Really? Someone, please tell me what her accomplishments were.
She gained a foothold on the national stage as Bill's wife.
She won the New York Senate as Bill's wife.
She was given an extra-constitutional role in trying to roll out healthcare overhaul in 1993-94 and bungled that, despite Democratic majorities in both houses.
She had zero discernible accomplishments as a senator.
She had all the money and resources in 2008 and was completely waxed by an upstart from Illinois with not even a full term to his credit.
As a sop to the Clinton crowd, she was given the State Department and did exactly nothing to further either the interests of the United States or world peace.
And, once again, she had all the money and resources in the world and lost to possibly the worst political candidate in United States history. Heck, she failed to campaign in crucial states such as Wisconsin, chiefly because she was too concerned with schmoozing with celebrities. Heck, she was getting half-million-dollar honorariums for giving speeches at Goldman Sachs after it helped engineer the near collapse of the United States economy in 2008-9. I mean, how dumb was that?
In other words, she was the ultimate insider whose entire campaign was "Hey, you owe me. I'm due." Want evidence? All you have to do is compare campaign slogans. Donald Trump's was "Make America Great Again." Not the most original slogan ever, but serviceable. What was Hillary Clinton's? "I'm With Her." Donald Trump at least made his slogan about the country. Hillary Clinton's was about herself and her cult of personality.
So help me understand. Why did people swoon -- and continue to swoon -- over this person who seems to lack both charisma, ability, and basic political instincts?
Trump won because he had a message that he took to every corner of America in a campaign frenzy that rallied the good honest hard working people of this nation. The message was simply to enforce existing laws, create economic prosperity and make us feel safe and secure. Hillary's message that she only brought to her fan base was one of more of the same Obama policies while increasing the refugee program, allowing more migrants to come across the border, easing up on criminals while blaming the Police and eventually disarming the American public with "common sense" gun restrictions.
Trump was a gamble but Hillary was a sure thing of scandal and back door political dealings that the media would have danced around and downplayed.
In 2016 we really only had one choice for the future of America.
Please register to post and access all features of our very popular forum. It is free and quick. Over $68,000 in prizes has already been given out to active posters on our forum. Additional giveaways are planned.
Detailed information about all U.S. cities, counties, and zip codes on our site: City-data.com.
Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
