Are we making wrong & lazy assumptions about Trump's appeal & his followers?

Politics & Elections
21

Another relevant question is, what kind of alternative choices do Trump supporters have?

The Republican Party has been carefully grooming its followers for the past several decades to despise government, to resent and fear minorities (whether racial or cultural) as threats to the stability of society, to identify with the interests of wealthy industrialists and automatically hate all things liberal, and to rely on magical thinking as a substitute for seriously engaging with a whole host of economic, scientific, regulatory and foreign-policy issues.

Who else in the Republican candidate lineup are they going to want to vote for? A bunch of second- or third-tier establishment politicians with no particular ideas and no popular reputation aren’t serious competition.

22

To the “rule following”, I would add very black & white thinking and once their mind is made up on a subject not much in the way of further intellectual curiosity. They tend not to put much thought into real-world human behavior or the views of any group outside of their own. On top of that a very partisan almost tribal view of identity. I have seen my FIL all of a sudden gain an interest in guns and religion (I’m 99% certain he was an atheist) since becoming a Teabagger.

To be fair, I see the same thing on the far left, the progressives, Occupiers or whatever. What I call the “fairy dusters” because they think just adding a regulation or government program will fix any problem. It’s amazing how much a like my fairy duster sister-in-law and her tea bagging father are a like in personality.

Contrary to the narrative here and in the larger world, blue-collar and/or poor white does not equal low intelligence. Also Trump supporters are better described as Middle American Radicals not poor whites/blue collar. There are plenty of white collar folks and small business owners in this group.

23

Yep. My co-worker, who makes about 150K a year, is a diehard Trumper. He is also not very well informed on issues, and has a hard time stating which of Trump’s policies he actually supports.

Well, actually that’s not entirely true. He is all about building a wall. He is all about deporting illegals. Totally on board with bullying other countries into doing what we want them to do. Fervently anti-Muslim.

So, what I should say, is that he is unable to state exactly what Trump would really be able to do about any of these issues. But he does love him some Trump. He gets positively gleeful when the Donald says something completely crazy. He says it’s non-PC, and he loves it. Says that’s what we need more of.

:dubious:

24

My wife and I are extremely liberal on most causes. Sat eve we had 2 other couples over for dinner - longtime friends, also extremely liberal. I asked if they thought there was any chance Trump could be elected. The one guy reminded us that 12 and 16 years ago we were observing how there was no way W could get elected and re-elected.

Don’t underestimate the number of ignorant, angry people out there. And if liberals don’t turn out, we have no one but ourselves to blame.

25

I think that’s a major attractive point to a lot of people when talking about Trump. And to a large degree, I think it’s a backlash against the way that “traditional” politicians tend to talk about things (or avoid talking about them entirely) in such a way to not offend anyone or take a clear stand on anything. This is perceived as talking out of both sides of their mouths and/or being mealy-mouthed.

When Trump comes along and takes a clear stand and says something inflammatory, obnoxious and hyperbolic in the course of taking that stand, it’s perceived by that crowd as refreshing, even if what he’s actually saying isn’t so great. It’s the contrast between him and the other candidates in terms of how they say things, and also the black/white nature (again, the contrast) of how he’s describing things that is so attractive.
So when the news drones ask them what to do about illegal immigration, and some candidates talk about the rights of the illegals, and how it’s a touchy subject, and basically try not to take a particularly hard stand one way or another, and then Trump comes along and says “We’ll build a fucking wall, make Mexico pay for it, and ship all those beaners to the other side!” , people like that. Not because they really like the idea of a wall, or think that there should be mass deportations, or even that Mexico will actually be expected to pay for it. They like it because he’s taken a stand, and a very firm, belligerent one at that.

26

I don’t give a shit if Trump’s people have legitimate concerns. Real or not, they have a choice in how to deal with them and they’ve chosen nasty, brutish and vengeful. Lower class America does have real problems, but Trump’s followers have created a new one by introducing their thuggish ugliness into the mix. They’re a problem unto themselves now.

I suspect the same question was asked about Germans during the rise of nazism, and we know how well that turned out for everyone. As real and serious as the problems were in Germany, and they were a lot worse than the American workers’ problems are now, how they dealt with them turned out to be the biggest problem for the country.

The effects of illegal immigration on employment is a drop in the ocean of problems that the working class has. When white people with jobs find it hard to make ends meet, it’s hardly the fault of the relative handful of illegals whose numbers are actually declining, as Philly Guy pointed out:

Despite what they say, Trump’s followers are showing themselves to hate all immigrants, including legals. There’s a reason why Trump has the support of white supremacists, and why he’s not rejecting them.

27

I have a theory about Trump, and this thread is as good a place as any for it.

One big thing helping Trump is that many people don’t believe him. He’s so over-the-top that people know he’s not being 100% genuine, and people are able to pick and choose which part they think is a bluff.

So the people who like that he’s an opinionated guy with no filter operating outside of the political system can like that about him, and they assume that the extreme stances on stuff like immigration are a front, and that he’s secretly more liberal. In the meantime, the people who love the anti-immigrant stuff but are turned off by his uncouth ways can assume that his mannerisms are all an act.

He’s such an anomaly that people can see what they want to see in him, which means he can attract a wider swath of people than one would expect.

28

Very well put, I think.

29

For a lot of them, yeah.

Dilbert cartoonist Scott Adams, a huge Trump supporter, printed a letter on his blog from another Trump supporter that said “I need a strong father figure to lead me and then I will be more of a man.” I mean, I’m not reading that in, it’s right there:

[QUOTE=Some guy named Troy]
I know I’m not the only man who admires you, and can’t wait for you to become the father, and leader, of our country. It’s been a long, cold winter for men in America the last 8 years, and I believe that your election will dramatically improve the level of respect, admiration, and love people will show for strong men and Fathers, and will create a new generation of leaders from impressionable young boys.
[/QUOTE]

I must stress that this paragraph, which closes the letter, is not preceded by a discussion of policy, ideas, or even a coherent explanation of what America lacks. It’s just “You’re a winner, you’re a MAN, a winner, a man, a man, a winner” over and over again. It’s actually very sad, from this guy’s perspective.

But that appeals. Some people do not want a President, they want a dictator.

30

Josh Marshall makes a pretty fair attempt to suss out Trump’s appeal in this piece. He makes a good-faith effort to be fair and give Trump supporters the benefit of the doubt, to the extent that he doesn’t simply denounce them as racist idiots. Quote:

31

Incomplete, perhaps, but not inaccurate.

No, that would be Sanders. Trump can’t speak it, at any level, because he doesn’t know it.

. . . is IRL probably a non-problem.

32

I accept that completely, that the manner they have chosen to deal with and express their concerns, real or perceived, is thuggish and ugly and a problem in and of itself.

Of course part of the correct and effective response to that is to beat them at the ballot box.

Longer term though that is merely a Band Aid solution, because if they are supporting Trump as a misguided and harmful response to perceived problems that persist, then Trump is merely the transient symptom of the underlying disease.

Now I am not so sure that the all of what concerns his supporters should be addressed, some of what triggers their anxiety are social changes that they just need to get used to. But we should want to understand and address some of the concerns they have for the good of all of us. The best way to neutralize the threat that the reactions to these problems are triggering and may continue to trigger is to address the core problems.

Do not take the following wrong … I completely get Black Lives Matter. I understand that the message is the implied Black Lives Matter Too. Some less educated working class, and especially rural Whites I think are feeling that society is telling them that their do not also matter. In parts of rural America towns are dying, extended families living nearby is a thing of memory. The good jobs that their parents had are gone. Heroin use and suicide rates are up. And the national conversation rarely addresses those as items of sustained focused concern to the point of providing solutions.

Ignoring the root causes of Trumpism is laziness and the rest of us are lazy about this at our own risk.

33

It may be useful to look at a history of 20th century American populist demagogues. Names on that list include George Wallace, Joe McCarthy, Father Coughlin, Huey Long, David Duke, and maybe Benjamin Tillman, though he started in the 19th century.

You can certainly argue that their millions of followers had real concerns and desperately looked to leaders who stood up against the establishment while speaking out for people like them.

Yet each of them are remembered as some of the worst villains in American history.

Is this a paradox? Unfortunately, no. Working class and rural Americans have historically been some of the poorest and worst represented groups, among the earliest hit by economic and technological disruptions and widely ignored by elites. It is also fair to say that they were among the least educated, most insular, most nativist, and least tolerant groups in the country. These are ripe conditions for anger against perceived enemies and especially toward groups that were perceived to compete for their scarce resources. Those of other races and religions, immigrants, newcomers, adherents of purportedly false doctrines and libertine morals became targets.

Politicians who articulated their discontents and provided convenient enemies to hate and target always did well, sometimes successful in alleviating local conditions, sometimes losing in ways to create more bitterness.

Occasionally, a figure arose especially gifted in these skills, an outsider even when part of the establishment party (as with Tillman and McCarthy). Their legacies are outsized compared to their actual power; legacies of hatred, oppression, bad laws, and ruined lives.

If Trump is one of these demagogues then his appeal to his followers will be a mixture of the rational and irrational, which naturally make them difficult for outsiders to fathom. One can sympathize with their needs while simultaneously denouncing their response with the same fervor given to the South’s response to civil rights in the 1960s. Critics were not making wrong and lazy assumptions about their behaviors then, but wholly accurate ones. I think the critics of Trump’s followers today are equally accurate.

34

Yet Exapno, if those supporters had not been so “widely ignored by elites” the perhaps their anger would have reached the critical mass needed to support demagoguery.

Many of the factors that scare them and thus incite them are unavoidable as part of overall progress. But perhaps if at least “the ladders of opportunity” that Clinton speaks of were also specifically, explicitly, and very visibly placed to help this population deal with the economic and technological disruptions that have hit them early and hard too, they might be less ripe for the picking by the next demagogue.

35

They were there, as plain as day. They were the same “ladders” that the minorities had, only they have been in place longer. Nobody forced them, or me, to stay in one job until the bottom fell out. They, and I, were seduced by high wages, but unlike them I went to school nights and picked up other job skills so when the inevitable happened (and change is always inevitable) I could recover. And yeah, my replacement job is no match for the first, but that’s okay because I know that I made this bed. Rather than blaming everybody but themselves, they should look in a mirror. Minorities aren’t getting special favors. They are finally getting the same favors Trump supporters ignored.

36

I am not claiming that minorities are getting special favors.

And I claim no special or expert knowledge knowledge about the problems that face rural working class communities. I do however doubt that the same exact approach is appropriate for different issues. And that the problem is so simplistic as staying in one job until the bottom fell out.

No offense but you sound very similar to those dismissive of issues that face some lower SES minorities: “I went to night school and pulled myself (back) up, so can they.”

How available are these programs in these communities? How many of them are reputable and how many on par with Trump University? What is the job placement rate afterwards? How much debt? How does that address the loss of communities, the death of towns, the Diaspora of extended families?

37

Have you gotten your answer at this point are you moving the goalposts around? No, Trump is not speaking truth to power. Yes, he’s speaking to real concerns they have. Yes, for whatever reason, they’ve decided that their best solutuion is a reality-TV celebrity selling an authoritarian schtick. It’s very possible that their concerns aren’t simply unemployment or terrorism but, assuming the system is irredeemably broken, simply putting up a middle finger to the establishment.

38

The underlying problem might not be immigration (which has reversed w.r.t. Mexico) or gays. The underlying problem might be unchallenged nonsense purveyed on certain radio and TV outlets.

Maybe. Unlike the OP, I think you can’t understand the Trump phenomenon without acknowledging the underlying ignorance of his supporters. Because a tall shiny wall won’t do squat. If you’re serious about immigration taking jobs you hit the problem at the employer level. The problem is business and agricultural interests won’t put up with that. So you get nonsense and posturing.

Similarly, lousy economic prospects have a lot to do with the US’s lost decade, 2007-2015 I hope. And that could have been solved within 3 years with a stimulus package (which we got), a medium term infrastructure investment splurge, a helicopter drop and a 3% inflation target adopted by the Federal Reserve. But the Republicans obstructed and their donors stopped caring about soft wages when their margins ballooned. Corporate profits as a share of GDP are quite high now.

I still say it’s more fun to run a company when the economy is booming. Rational zillionaires would reign the GOP in, knocking heads if necessary. A pro-science, pro-rationality Super PAC wouldn’t hurt either.

39

That underlying ignorance, often willful ignorance, is being exploited by Trump, as demagogues usually do, is of course acknowledged.

The rational zillionaires have of course been exploiting that ignorance themselves for years, thinking that they could keep the ignorant masses reined (so they could continue to reign) but clearly they can no longer do so. And they are in a bit of a pickle in that without the support of the ignorant they lose, even in Congress. Looking to them to address any of the the root causes of Trumpism is unrealistic.

40

I agree fully. His “go fuck yourself” demeanor and commentary is refreshing. You get the impression that the guy will do something to make a difference. I think the comments that he would be the next Hitler is a bit over the top. He is a very successful businessman and has made contacts all over the world. Hell, he is being criticized by the Republicans as not being a “real conservative.”

So which is it? Is he so far right that he is a dangerous fascist or is he a closeted liberal who really supported Hillary? It can’t be both, and I think part of his appeal is that he is driving the entrenched politicians from both sides absolutely nuts.

I think the people have seen 16 years of government simply not working and any compromise being the worst of both world solutions (see e.g. Obamacare, and Bush’s Medicare prescription drug benefit, the response to terrorism, etc.). Neither side wants to be considered extreme, so they do half-assed wishy washy stuff. Whatever Trump does will not be half-assed, and middle class voters want to see something done when they cannot pay their bills.

Whether that is a good reason to vote for Trump or not, I leave to the reader, but I sure as hell hang on his every word and love it when he is obnoxious.