The Ends Justify the Means

did I say I was afraid of a commie scare? I'm saying the Republicans will scare a lot of people against Bernie. The people who are pro Trump are not going to look at how he treats protestors and say we'll vote for Bernie because of how Trump treats protestors. Dems are worried that the protesters against Trump will make things worse for them. I don't know if they are right or wrong, but their worry makes sense. 

Just as all of us worry about what it will mean for us if Trump were to win.

"The people who are pro Trump are not going to look at how he treats protestors and say we'll vote for Bernie because of how Trump treats protestors."

I wouldn't be so sure about that, gerryl.

Good luck then

you are only seeing what is shown on TV.  I abhor Trump, but lots of his supporters are not thugs, they just don't make the news for cheering.

Oh. Then maybe they should tell thugs to sit down and shut up.

FilmCarp said:

you are only seeing what is shown on TV.  I abhor Trump, but lots of his supporters are not thugs, they just don't make the news for cheering.

Did you see anything that wasn't on TV? Perhaps you know some well-bred Trump fans who would never punch anyone in the face.

Good luck to them.

gerryl said:
. Dems are worried that the protesters against Trump will make things worse for them. 

I don't know what you mean by this.  This particular Dem is worried that the protesters against Trump are being denied their right to peaceful protest, and/or are being punched in the face.

I am on iPhone so I am perhaps not as explicit as I would like to be. Some Dems are expressing concern when some of the Trump protesters are not behaving peacefully. I'm merely sharing what I have read. 

springgreen2 said:

FilmCarp said:

you are only seeing what is shown on TV.  I abhor Trump, but lots of his supporters are not thugs, they just don't make the news for cheering.

Did you see anything that wasn't on TV? 

Yes.

RobB said:

springgreen2 said:

FilmCarp said:

you are only seeing what is shown on TV.  I abhor Trump, but lots of his supporters are not thugs, they just don't make the news for cheering.

Did you see anything that wasn't on TV? 

Yes.

What? Were you at a rally, Filmcarp?

gerryl said:

I am on iPhone so I am perhaps not as explicit as I would like to be. Some Dems are expressing concern when some of the Trump protesters are not behaving peacefully. I'm merely sharing what I have read. 

Some Republicans are expressing that concern also, you might notice.

rob b said yes, not me.  I wouldn't go near Trump, but I have coworkers, other blue collar guys like me, who I am slowly trying to wean away from him.  Some are racist, but most are just tired of barely keeping their heads above water.  I think I may have actually convinced one or two to vote for the Democrats.  Have you tried to help stem this in any way?  Or are you just going to continue to stick everyone in the little compartments you have made to make yourself feel better?

Trump said he wants to.ruin protesters lives. People are being pepper sprayed outside.

FilmCarp said:

rob b said yes, not me.  I wouldn't go near Trump, but I have coworkers, other blue collar guys like me, who I am slowly trying to wean away from him.  Some are racist, but most are just tired of barely keeping their heads above water.  I think I may have actually convinced one or two to vote for the Democrats.  Have you tried to help stem this in any way?  Or are you just going to continue to stick everyone in the little compartments you have made to make yourself feel better?

When I was a child almost all blue collar folks voted Democratic. The Republicans were seen as the Party of the rich and the Dems were the Party of the working people. My folks who never finished high school would never ever vote for a Republican.

When did that change and why did it change? I happen to think it had a lot to do with race. As a result of the Civil Rights Acts and the War on Poverty the Democratic Party is viewed by elements of the white working class not as their Party but as the Party of racial minorities and welfare recipients.

Bernie Sanders repeatedly says that almost all newly created wealth is going to the few at the top. The anger of his supporters is directed to those who are far better off. The anger of working class Trump supporters is directed toward those who are actually below them and worse off in many ways.

The Sanders proposal for free college would directly benefit working people by helping them send their kids to college so they could have a better life than their parents. How does "making America great again" or deporting illegal immigrants actually help working people? Are they just worried about competition for menial jobs. Is their aspiration for their children just to be able to have the same lousy jobs that they have had?

The working people I grew up among did not worry about their children having to compete for jobs with low skilled immigrants. They wanted their kids to become doctors and lawyers and engineers and scientists, and they succeeded.

The few Trump supporters I know are making a practical decision about up-ending the political establishment within the context of their party.     The irony is that many Bernie and Trump supporters share interests, such as on trade policies.

tjohn said:

Try reading some articles on how Trump is appealing to the hopes and fears of a lot of people whose economic situation is pretty lousy where in the not too distant past it was pretty good.  You can explain this away as racism or ignorance if that makes you feel better, but in so doing, you complete misread the situation.

Of course this is based on racism. When Trump started his campaign he defined his position very clearly by saying that Mexicans were rapists who needed to be stopped at the border. He was trading on the same fears of rape and pillage that colonialists put forward regarding indigenous people here in America, the same fears of sullied white womanhood advanced by founding fathers regarding newly arrived Africans and then by southern planters with regard to the Black men they were then breeding for profit. Western expansionists regularly warned about the 'red savages' as they rounded up and corralled and murdered Indians. And Reconstruction era politicians controlled their electorate by pointing to newly freed slaves as dangerous animals looking to take advantage of white women and destroy the families and livelihoods of white men. None of this is new.

Trumps tactics are textbook racist and in America racism is intertwined with economics. The 'situation' as you refer to it, is that lower and middle class white Americans have been sold a bill of goods for generations and some of them are starting to figure it out and they are angry. A good portion of that anger springs from ignorance. They accept a border fence as a solution for unemployment because they're ignorant about American capitalism and American history. They accept banning Muslims because their ignorance of world events prevents them from analyzing their country's role in destabilizing the Middle East. They're angry at the press (which is of course owned by the one percent that has been lying to them for decades) because Trump, a would be one percenter himself tells them to be angry at the press. This circular ignorance creates fear and in those most desperate, it breeds violence.

Master capitalist Donald Trump as a savior to masses of Americans whose economic situation is 'lousy' would be comical if it wasn't so pathetic.

springgreen2 said:

Mr. Kenboy,

Being poor isn't an excuse for being a bigot. Being poor is not a requirement for being a bigot. Lots of rich people are terrible bigots. There are easily 47% of Republicans who are bigots. All you have to do to be a bigot is to make generalizations about individuals based on the groups they belong to, either by birth or by other forms of identification.

Yes about 47% of Republicans are bigots, 53% of Democrats are also bigots.

tjohn said:

BCC said:

It is so easy to smear an entire group by calling them racists rather than find the real reasons why, for example, the White working class is moving to Trump. 

It's quite a problem, actually.  I can understand the appeal of a promise to bring back the good old days, but countering this appeal is hard.  It is hard because the good old days aren't coming back, but that isn't a very attractive message.  Globalization, with or without trade agreements and tariffs, is here to stay and policies and programs need to be developed to deal with this reality.

+10

lord_pabulum said:

springgreen2 said:

Mr. Kenboy,

Being poor isn't an excuse for being a bigot. Being poor is not a requirement for being a bigot. Lots of rich people are terrible bigots. There are easily 47% of Republicans who are bigots. All you have to do to be a bigot is to make generalizations about individuals based on the groups they belong to, either by birth or by other forms of identification.

Yes about 47% of Republicans are bigots, 53% of Democrats are also bigots.

Could be.

flimbro said:

tjohn said:

Try reading some articles on how Trump is appealing to the hopes and fears of a lot of people whose economic situation is pretty lousy where in the not too distant past it was pretty good.  You can explain this away as racism or ignorance if that makes you feel better, but in so doing, you complete misread the situation.

Of course this is based on racism. When Trump started his campaign he defined his position very clearly by saying that Mexicans were rapists who needed to be stopped at the border. He was trading on the same fears of rape and pillage that colonialists put forward regarding indigenous people here in America, the same fears of sullied white womanhood advanced by founding fathers regarding newly arrived Africans and then by southern planters with regard to the Black men they were then breeding for profit. Western expansionists regularly warned about the 'red savages' as they rounded up and corralled and murdered Indians. And Reconstruction era politicians controlled their electorate by pointing to newly freed slaves as dangerous animals looking to take advantage of white women and destroy the families and livelihoods of white men. None of this is new.

Trumps tactics are textbook racist and in America racism is intertwined with economics. The 'situation' as you refer to it, is that lower and middle class white Americans have been sold a bill of goods for generations and some of them are starting to figure it out and they are angry. A good portion of that anger springs from ignorance. They accept a border fence as a solution for unemployment because they're ignorant about American capitalism and American history. They accept banning Muslims because their ignorance of world events prevents them from analyzing their country's role in destabilizing the Middle East. They're angry at the press (which is of course owned by the one percent that has been lying to them for decades) because Trump, a would be one percenter himself tells them to be angry at the press. This circular ignorance creates fear and in those most desperate, it breeds violence.

Master capitalist Donald Trump as a savior to masses of Americans whose economic situation is 'lousy' would be comical if it wasn't so pathetic.

I don't think that racism is the driving factor.  If the economic situation hadn't worsened for a lot of people, Trump wouldn't be doing so well.  I am not denying the existence of racism by any means.  What I am saying is that when people are feeling confident and prosperous, appeals to racist and xenophobic tendencies don't work nearly as well as when people feeling like they are falling behind.

Now, what to do with an economy that is no longer providing good livings for as many people is the challenge.

Racism and xenophobia always work and they are always a driving factor, in good times and bad. In bad times the scary, violent 'other' is used as a scapegoat for society's problems (any immigrants=theft of services and lack of jobs. Blacks=more theft of services/want something for nothing. Gay rights=moral upheaval/decay).  In better times the same scary, violent 'other' threatens to "take away what we have so we must be vigilant" (Muslims hate what we have, they're envious and evil). 

The casting may shift slightly per the situation, but the role is always present in American politics because it is a basic tenet of our society and a tried and true method of maintaining economic, racial and gender based superiority.

Testing your hypothesis is relatively easy. When was the last time people were feeling confident and prosperous?  Was this matched by an upsurge of equality or even a lessening of racist / xenophobic rhetoric?  When were those good ole days?

flimbro said:

Racism and xenophobia always work and they are always a driving factor, in good times and bad. In bad times the scary, violent 'other' is used as a scapegoat for society's problems (any immigrants=theft of services and lack of jobs. Blacks=more theft of services/want something for nothing. Gay rights=moral upheaval/decay).  In better times the same scary, violent 'other' threatens to "take away what we have so we must be vigilant" (Muslims hate what we have, they're envious and evil). 

The casting may shift slightly per the situation, but the role is always present in American politics because it is a basic tenet of our society and a tried and true method of maintaining economic, racial and gender based superiority.


Testing your hypothesis is relatively easy. When was the last time people were feeling confident and prosperous?  Was this matched by an upsurge of equality or even a lessening of racist / xenophobic rhetoric?  When were those good ole days?

Well, I think a lot of people would point to Bill Clinton's administration.  I don't think he is entitled to as much of the goodwill he is credited with.  Hillary has been a beneficiary of this goodwill during this election.  

He was born on third base.   The monies he has invested would have garnered 4 times what he has now

had he placed them in a simple index fund.  He games the system by declaring bankruptcies.

He has yet to declare who his 'really good" foreign policy advisers will be

He appeals to the lowest common denominator

Even his own Party is keeping their distance

David Brooks points out that for democracy to work, citizens have to respect their opposition as well intended and be willing to compromise with them for democracy to work. He points out that vilifying the opposition is an approach that belongs to authoritarian forms of government. He worries that America is becoming more and more intolerant of the opposition on all sides. Not aimed at present company, but you can see that trend clearly on MOL. 

Trump really puts that idea to the test doesnt it?

Red_Barchetta said:

flimbro said:

Racism and xenophobia always work and they are always a driving factor, in good times and bad. In bad times the scary, violent 'other' is used as a scapegoat for society's problems (any immigrants=theft of services and lack of jobs. Blacks=more theft of services/want something for nothing. Gay rights=moral upheaval/decay).  In better times the same scary, violent 'other' threatens to "take away what we have so we must be vigilant" (Muslims hate what we have, they're envious and evil). 

The casting may shift slightly per the situation, but the role is always present in American politics because it is a basic tenet of our society and a tried and true method of maintaining economic, racial and gender based superiority.


Testing your hypothesis is relatively easy. When was the last time people were feeling confident and prosperous?  Was this matched by an upsurge of equality or even a lessening of racist / xenophobic rhetoric?  When were those good ole days?

Well, I think a lot of people would point to Bill Clinton's administration.  I don't think he is entitled to as much of the goodwill he is credited with.  Hillary has been a benefactor of this goodwill during this election.  

Don't you mean beneficiary rather than benefactor?

yes, good catch.  

Red_Barchetta said:

flimbro said:

Racism and xenophobia always work and they are always a driving factor, in good times and bad. In bad times the scary, violent 'other' is used as a scapegoat for society's problems (any immigrants=theft of services and lack of jobs. Blacks=more theft of services/want something for nothing. Gay rights=moral upheaval/decay).  In better times the same scary, violent 'other' threatens to "take away what we have so we must be vigilant" (Muslims hate what we have, they're envious and evil). 

The casting may shift slightly per the situation, but the role is always present in American politics because it is a basic tenet of our society and a tried and true method of maintaining economic, racial and gender based superiority.


Testing your hypothesis is relatively easy. When was the last time people were feeling confident and prosperous?  Was this matched by an upsurge of equality or even a lessening of racist / xenophobic rhetoric?  When were those good ole days?

Well, I think a lot of people would point to Bill Clinton's administration.  I don't think he is entitled to as much of the goodwill he is credited with.  Hillary has been a beneficiary of this goodwill during this election.  

I'd agree, he isn't entitled and both he and Hillary have acknowledged the same in their own special way.

Clinton made a point of campaigning to 'end welfare as we know it' and promised to be tough on crime. He did this while ignoring most of what Black and brown communities were concerned about like education, employment and housing and instead used them as an example of what was wrong in American society to court white votes. He did this to move the Democratic party to the right by appealing to the issues important to Reagan Democrats. 

His race based campaign promises came to fruition and helped hasten the emergence of broken and disenfranchised families, paramilitary police forces, privatized prisons, lopsided sentencing for Black and brown Americans and mass incarceration that continued throughout his presidency.

So, I would conclude that Clinton's prosperous and confident tenure was marked with the same racism and xenophobia of any other president's term.

Me too.  I guess the fact that those 8 years are looked upon fondly shows us how low the bar is. 

And how easy it is to accept the hunter's version of his travails with the lion.