Elephants and Jackasses...

The analogies to Reagan and Hitler are both apt. The problem is everyone on this side of history sees Hitler for what he was able to get away with in total, but the slide was much more gradual than you might think. This is not to say the crazy was not there to see prior to his ascendency, it certainly was. But Hitler's initial rise to power basically revolved around telling a beaten and battered country whose economy was in shambles that they were great, and all these outside forces were responsible for their fall from some imagined graceful past. Sound familiar?

Look, the reality is Trump did not appeal to the majority of public voters. He garnered about as many votes as Romney. The difference being that this election was about change - at any cost.

Most Americans, as I've posted time and time again, are hurting. They are realizing that the American Dream is all but unattainable for them. In short, they feel less invested in society than ever before. They have lived under many Presidents on 'both sides' (in quotes because in actuality both R's and D's over the past 40 years have essentially enacted the same fiscal policies) since Reagan and their lives never seem to get better. At best, they are able to hold on to what they already have, and they fear what's going to happen to their children. And many already see what is happening to their children - playing by the rules, going to college, and still not getting decent work that they can feel good about. So they're mad because they believed, at least in part, the political system of the past 40 years. The jury is back, it isn't working, and they were faced with a candidate that promised significant, immediate, and beneficial change and a candidate that was established, whom also promised change. The believed one, maybe, but more importantly, gave a healthy fuck you to the system. As I've previously posted though, as we've seen over the last week, it will turn into a 'fuck me' very quickly.

The comparison to Reagan is also apt. Reagan and Trump are both 'big idea' guys who leave it to others to work out the details. Reagan had competent people - for the most part around him - whom at least understood the nuts and bolts of governance. So far, what I'm seeing from the Trump team is a lot of incompetence. Kushner - one of the heads of the transition team - didn't realize that they have to replace the entire White House staff. The other head of transition, Pence, isn't stepping down as Governor, and is pursuing a lawsuit to keep some of his emails secret. Then we have Prebius, who has no governing experience, and Bannon, whom also has not governing experience of note, as the two main advisors. While some of these guys are insiders - they don't have proven track records. In fact, Pence, in 12 years in Congress, never got a piece of legislation passed. None. In 12 years. True, he is a governor, but like when he was a Congressman, it will require governing skills to get things through a Congress that while the same 'party' may or may not be on the same page on many issues.

Ultimately, there will be an America in 4 years, but that America will either look precisely the same - thus leading to even more extreme candidates and potentially a challenge in a primary to a sitting President, or it will look worse in some fundamentally important ways. Not because Trump is necessarily 'evil' but he's a narcissist that is uniquely unqualified for the biggest job in the world, and has not surrounded himself to date with people that are qualified.

There is a skill to governance. So in sum, yes, I get the anti establishment sentiment, but for me, Sanders was the guy because while he understood how to govern, he thoroughly rejected the establishment, and has most of his career.

 

The Bernie Sanders hindsight bias is interesting. Many are now saying he would have defeated Trump or another Republican challenger, but I'm not so sure. That statement is based on a few early polls that took place during the primaries. As a repudiation of the system, the voters were also repudiating a perceived left wing bias in society. Everyone that criticizes Islam is a racist. Safe spaces. Black Lives Matter and the unquestioned adoration by the Democrats. The list goes on. I'm not sure how electing someone much further to the left of Hillary Clinton would be an effective strategy. Sanders had almost no foreign policy ideas or viable domestic policies other than socialist nonsense that would never make it out of Congressional subcommittees. If the Democrats move further to the Left, they will lose again in 2020.

As for Sanders being anti-establishment, the guy has been in the game for over 25 years. That makes him the establishment no matter what the prevailing narrative says.

 

Still a favorite of mine:

While the rust best vote might have been repudiating democratic ideals, I still think the election came down to Hillary not being able to bring out her base by huge numbers compaired to Obama. If the dyed in the wool base showed up the rust belt Blue Dog democrats that ended up switching to Trump wouldn't have mattered. Impossible to know with any certainty that Bernie would have energized people enough to be the blow out people claim it would have been. While Republicans are solidly in control of the state legislatures, with shifting demographics Id still be worried on the national level since Republicans aren't going to get a hugely flawed rival every election.

 

This was a big point that Bill Maher made on his last show... if you haven't watched it, you might want to.

 

The other big takeaway that I seem to be seeing is that the Big Data crunching and garnering of the "online" and social media voter isn't worth shit... because they don't show up at the polls. They talk loud and strong in virtual space, but in reality are very weak. More of that vocal minority thing.

I think that ties into the point that ToyToy makes.

 

If you're constantly being hammered by the PC Police, and are constantly being told that you're the problem and that you don't matter (you white CIS male you), then yeah, you're probably going to vote for what is right for you, first and foremost.

 

If Trump does nothing else of value in his presidency, his candidacy did put an effective end to the two most power political families in one election cycle.

 

Dude... he TOLD YOU WHY HE VOTED FOR TRUMP... and you're arguing that point.

You may not agree with them, but how can you question what he's telling you his motivation was?

 

I think it's more that there are two people, one is yelling at you and talking shit about you all the time, and one isn't, so you go with the one who isn't.