Exactly. Trump is one of these people, which is why they love him so much. That he is in a position of such great responsibility is incredibly dangerous.
He’s not actually one of these people so much as he pretends to be, but I agree he is dangerous.
For me it’s mostly the way that he openly lies, even about recorded things he’s previously said, is disturbing and that he takes the already toxic political rhetoric of the last decade to the next level.
Out of curiosity, how do you feel now, 2.5 years in? If you knew in November 2016 what you know now, would you still have voted for him? Do you plan to vote for him in 2020? Not trying to troll or start a political flamewar here, I'm genuinely interested, especially as it's pretty rare that a HNer will "admit" to being a Trump voter.
The thing that always gets me is that even though Trump presented himself as this tear-down-the-establishment, drain-the-swamp kind of guy, it always seemed pretty likely that he'd just replace the political establishment with people in the business/finance establishment, which is essentially the same thing to many/most of the people who this platform resonated with. And, well... that's exactly what he's done, aside from the other expected outcomes of inflaming racial/gender/etc. divides; ignorantly bumbling his way through economic, trade, and foreign policy; and lying his way through every day in office. What is it about that which still lends him support? Is it still just the chaos? Because he's not actually fixing anything for most of his supporters; the elites are still just as elite as ever, and at best it's status quo, but in many cases things are worse.
Put another way: it just seems unlikely to me that all the "burn it to the ground" supporters expected or are happy with the fact that burning it all down also causes them more suffering, too; more suffering than the establishment has been hit with. And yet, here we are.
I normally don't admit to it, but I've become less fearful of the backlash lately.
Current plan is to vote for him in 2020. Worst case I will abstain from voting for President.
The economy is still on fire as much as it's ever been in the midwest. Can't complain there.
The trade war is unfortunate, but the alternative is to bend over and take it from China. Everyone agrees that they don't play fair. So the options are to do something about it, or to just let them keep on. My family has a manufacturing background, so all the offshoring is sort of personal.
The racial crap isn't nearly as much of an issue as the media likes to make it. It makes for good ratings, though.
---
Basically I'm hedging my bets on at worst I think the government should be robust enough not to be brought down by one bad leader. And if it is, then maybe we deserved to fall. Plus from my perspective he's not doing all that bad.
"The racial crap" appears to be crap media mongering primarily to those who haven't been on the receiving end of the fire hose (metaphorically or literally) some time in the past few decades. I'm sure it makes for good ratings, and the media makes the most of it, but that doesn't mean it's any less of an issue than portrayed.
> If you knew in November 2016 what you know now, would you still have voted for him? Do you plan to vote for him in 2020?
I'll throw my hat in the ring and say yes to both questions, under the circumstances.
> ignorantly bumbling his way through economic, trade, and foreign policy
I disagree with this characterization, but can certainly understand how someone could come to this conclusion.
> Put another way: it just seems unlikely to me that all the "burn it to the ground" supporters expected or are happy with the fact that burning it all down also causes them more suffering, too; more suffering than the establishment has been hit with. And yet, here we are.
I suspect the way they evaluate the situation is dramatically different than yours. There are a handful of people who are actually looking into what's behind the seemingly paradoxical (and coordinated) behavior of a large number of people around the world rather than just wagging their finger, but unfortunately hardly anyone seems interested in what they've found.
Ok I understand that conservatives view morality differently¹ , and factor in a wider range of concerns², fine.
But I don't see how voting for Trump advances conservative voters any further in shifting the moral framework to one they would prefer. I see trump mostly as amoral if anything.
Or is the point, as the study suggests, to burn down the system? To dismantle morally offensive programs/legislation? Am I missing something?
1: I.e. that it's not just about how we treat each other, but also supposed to act as an organizing principle for society.
2: loyalty, respect for authority purity
The main thing Trump has been doing as a favor to conservatives is heavily loading the court benches with conservative justices. That will have a long-term impact.
I think the mistake liberals make when looking at Trump, is they think he must be viewed by his supporters the same way they looked at Obama.
Obama is someone they looked up to on a personal, moral level.
Trump is, as you said, amoral. He goes where the political winds and his instinct take him.
I think people would feel much more at ease at least with the whole unstable, incompetent leader thing if they bothered to read Art of the Deal (written in 1987), in which he lays out how he views the world basically word for word in line with what he said during his 2016 campaign.
He may be unorthodox, but he is consistent.
Would I want to be his friend? Probably not. But that's not the role he applied for.
I'm not conservative, just FYI, so I find it interesting to discuss differences with thoughtful conservatives which you seem to be.
If conservatives value loyalty/respect for authority more than so called 'liberals', then aren't you afraid that the conservative agenda carried out to it's logical conclusion might descend into authoritarianism/theocracy?
(You didn't state that you held these views or preferences, but I just assumed them in the interest of getting my question out quicker. Correct me if I am wrong.)
Trump is far less "burn it to the ground" than his fans like to imagine. He's a friend to Wall Street, K Street, Raytheon Acres and the good old Kingdom of Saudi Arabia.
No, I think his supporters see the dog whistle too, but in reverse: the "wink" to establishment as the dog-whistle with the message to them as the "real" one. I don't think either interpretation is strictly correct. I don't think President Trump himself has a "canonical" interpretation of these things-- his sentiment is changeable, not ideological or even political.
Didn't see this Michael Moore video [1] until after the election, but it pretty well describes why I voted for him. I'm doing pretty well, but I have a blue collar background, and the people I grew up around weren't.
Didn't really figure he'd win, but my dad had died earlier in the year, and I figured he would have voted Trump, so I did it for him.
Wasn't really a "burn it to the ground" thing in a literal sense. Basically what the end of the video clip says: "It's going to be a big Fuck You to the establishment. And it will feel good."
And did the spirit behind that gesture last? He then went and teamed up with the same Republican politicians he pledged to be different from, and gave the establishment a big tax cut.
For me it’s mostly the way that he openly lies, even about recorded things he’s previously said, is disturbing and that he takes the already toxic political rhetoric of the last decade to the next level.