Do You Know Why Trump is Popular?

[StatGuy2000]

I'll respond in more detail when I have time later, but I want to refer you back to the stated purpose of the thread: this thread is primarilu for Lisa to hear from Republicans why they think Trump is so popular. So it shouldn't be a debate. You don't have to agree with the opinions/perceptions being discussed, you just have to be aware that they exist and they matter to Republicans.

You are right in that I don't have to agree with the opinions/perceptions being discussed, and I am most certainly aware that they exist. What I am arguing is that these opinions/perceptions are not based on fact or logic.

The liberal media thing has been done to death elsewhere on PF, so it shouldn't need to be discussed at all.

Yes it has, and I disagree with the premise of the issue, but that is another debate which I won't rehash here.

For Obama on race, since you say you'd never even heard of the idea that he could come across as anti-white, I will explain. I'll provide specifics later, but it is basically three things:
1. Obama goes into detain in his books about how he arrived at his racial identity. The short version is that he doesn't have to be black, that's a choice he made in large part due to animosity toward the white half of his ancestry.
2. His reactions toward the racial strife such as controversial police shooting have been primarily race based even in cases where race appears to have had no actual role.
3. Broader than #1 and #2, given his unique promise to trancend race and improve race relations, I blame him for the generally accepted fact (he mentioned it himself in the SOY speech) that relations got worse during his presidency.

I assume the anti-rich thing is self explanatory, since we'very discussed it before and the "99%" movement is an explicit us-vs-them attack on the 1% and the vague and much broader "rich".

russ, let me rebut each of your 3 main points (I will not go into the anti-rich thing for the moment):

Point #1: Again, I look forward to your specific instances where he expressed animosity toward his white half (in past quotes he has spoken glowingly of both his mother and his maternal grandparents who have raised him in multicultural Hawaii). And as a multiracial individual myself, both Obama and I have at various times in our lives have explored and questioned about what our own racial identity is. I choose to identify myself as multiracial, but given the history of the US, his choosing to identify as black is not in any way can be seen as a repudiation of his white ancestry.

Point #2: If you are referring to the shooting of Michael Brown in Ferguson, Missouri, can you be so certain that the issue is not race based? At any rate, here is a quote from Obama on that matter with respect to the officer involved, Darren Wilson, reported in ABC News:

“The finding that was made [by the Department of Justice] was that it was not unreasonable to determine that there was not sufficient evidence to charge Officer [Darren] Wilson. That was an objective, thorough, independent federal investigation..."

“We may never know exactly what happened. But Officer Wilson like anybody else who is charged with a crime benefits from due process and a reasonable doubt standard. And if there is uncertainty about what happened then you can’t just charge them anyway just because what happened was tragic.”

I don't know about you, but the above quotes don't particularly sound race-based to me.

Point #3: This is the weakest argument you've made thus far for 2 reasons: (1) Is it really the case that race relations are worse now than they were in the (recent)past, or does it only appear that way? One could argue that the rise of social media makes racial tensions more visible to the public. (2) If for argument's sake that race relations have worsened in recent years, does it really make any sense at all to blame Obama, or any president for that matter? Frankly, my belief is that racial tensions are primarily the fault of the racism of the people involved, and if anything, one could argue that right-wingers in the US (e.g. commentators on Fox News, Trump, Cruz, Ann Coulter) have done far more of the provoking of racial tensions than Obama.

 

[mheslep]

I'd never vote for him

That's what I say, until the possibility of Trump v Sanders or indited Hillary comes up. What say you then?

 

[mheslep]

couldn't dream of a reason

Agree with most all of your post. And if its Trump v Hillary, or Sanders?

 

[Isaac0427]

Agree with most all of your post. And if its Trump v Hillary, or Sanders?

At that point, I'm kind of screwed either way. I would probably not pick America's poison. I don't think I could live with voting for Trump or Clinton, so if I had to choose, I'd pick sanders, ONLY because I trust him and I don't think he is a bad person. This has nothing to do with his policies. The same would go with Cruz, Huckabee, Carson or Santorum.

 

[Dotini]

And if its Trump v Hillary, or Sanders?

One could vote Libertarian, as will I, or you could spoil (deface) your ballot in protest.

 

[mheslep]

One could vote Libertarian, as will I, or you could spoil (deface) your ballot in protest.

Which is to choose whichever major party candidate is in the lead at the time.

 

[Dotini]

Which is to choose whichever major party candidate is in the lead at the time.

Not in my case. I enjoy living in the 7th Congressional District of the State of Washington, possibly the most liberal in the nation. I can vote my conscience and rest assured my vote makes effectively no difference to the outcome of the general election.

 

[mheslep]

Congressional district is irrelevant to US Presidential elections.

 

[Dotini]

Congressional district is irrelevant to US Presidential elections.

It's the state that matters.

 

[mheslep]

It's the state that matters.

Yes. Washington went GOP for Reagan twice, for Ford in '76, for Nixon in '60 and '72, for Ike in '56. Not so lucky since Reagan. Washington is not quite a Minnesota.

 

[mheslep]

He can't do long-term damage

I'm not so sure. The President defines the party, more than any other person or group, at least for some years after entering office. Once nominated and elected, the idea that somehow the President would is not truly representative of the GOP doesn't hold.

 

[mheslep]

I wonder if this Iowan has made a decision.

 

[lisab]

OK, so here's a summary of responses in this tread answering the question of why Trump is popular:

• He voices commonly held opinions, tells it like it is
• Resentment and a feeling of oppression
• He has a message of peace/no more conflict, he has charisma
• Anger, frustration, and dissatisfaction
• Worry about the influence of the very wealthy, and since he's rich he will not be unduly influenced by it
  
• A desire for a strong leader
• People are scared and want protection
• The media give him more attention, which feeds his popularity
• The way Trump communicates leads people think that Trump agrees with their views
  
• His popularity is a reaction to how political correctness silences dissent
  
• General dissent
• The world is changing too quickly

To all who posted - thank you for your thoughts and for taking the time to post.

So much to think about here. Two in particular give me pause: the way Trump communicates leads people to think they're in agreement, and that his popularity is a reaction to political correctness silencing dissent.

 

[Jbunn]

Lisab

To answer your question, Many Trump supporters don't have good critical thinking skills. For example, "build a wall" separating Mexico from the US. Rational people might ask; "How do most immigrants arrive? Via a visa, or sneaking in?", "How long is the border? How much wall have we built so far, and at what cost? How much remains and why?" "How do we fence the parts of the 1,800 mile Rio Grande that marks much of our border? Mountains?" "How much is the cost if we build a fence? And how much if we don't?"

When you answer these questions we realize that building the "Trump fence" is not economically feasible, nor will it stop immigration. Not enough people have the critical thinking to work out the answers, and our media is not helping.

The great southern wall for 50 billion dollars will be immediately followed by purchase of the great southern ladders for $50 bucks at Home Depot...

 

[Silicon Waffle]

Well I have sort of a trolling question, almost ! Instead of building such a wall, why not invest the money to hire more police officers and guards around the border to keep everything in control ? That on one hand can help resolve the illegal immigration issue *in part* and on the other can create more jobs for people, not necessarily the officers alone. You can build *walls*. But without guards, troops to watch at many more checkpoints that also need to be built up, having walls or fence at the border doesn't make sense anymore.

 

[p1l0t]

El Chapo isn't worried about walls anyway haha

 

[Student100]

OK, so here's a summary of responses in this tread answering the question of why Trump is popular:

• He voices commonly held opinions, tells it like it is
• Resentment and a feeling of oppression
• He has a message of peace/no more conflict, he has charisma
• Anger, frustration, and dissatisfaction
• Worry about the influence of the very wealthy, and since he's rich he will not be unduly influenced by it
  
• A desire for a strong leader
• People are scared and want protection
• The media give him more attention, which feeds his popularity
• The way Trump communicates leads people think that Trump agrees with their views
  
• His popularity is a reaction to how political correctness silences dissent
  
• General dissent
• The world is changing too quickly

To all who posted - thank you for your thoughts and for taking the time to post.

So much to think about here. Two in particular give me pause: the way Trump communicates leads people to think they're in agreement, and that his popularity is a reaction to political correctness silencing dissent.

It might be helpful to add: He really isn't all that popular. His polling is mostly due to some 14 odd other Republican candidates splitting the vote, and no clear republican message. His favorability ratings are abysmal. The only candidate with a net positive currently is Bernie.

Anyway, I don't put too much stock into political polls myself to begin with. I worry about Ted Cruz more right now, he is scarier than Trump.

Lisab

To answer your question, Many Trump supporters don't have good critical thinking skills. For example, "build a wall" separating Mexico from the US. Rational people might ask; "How do most immigrants arrive? Via a visa, or sneaking in?", "How long is the border? How much wall have we built so far, and at what cost? How much remains and why?" "How do we fence the parts of the 1,800 mile Rio Grande that marks much of our border? Mountains?" "How much is the cost if we build a fence? And how much if we don't?"

When you answer these questions we realize that building the "Trump fence" is not economically feasible, nor will it stop immigration. Not enough people have the critical thinking to work out the answers, and our media is not helping.

You're trashing peoples critical thinking skills - people you've never met because they don't agree with you. Further, you obviously don't pay attention to the politicians you're criticizing. Trump has repeatedly said he would have mexico pay for the wall. Is this realistic? I don't know. Mexico benefits greatly from trade, so if a lucrative trade deal hinged on them finishing the wall, it would probably get done.

Further, many "immigrants" (See border patrol apprehensions: http://www.pewresearch.org/fact-tan...rehensions-of-mexicans-fall-to-historic-lows/) arrive illegally by crossing the border, not just visas overstays. That's the problem they're trying to fix with "the wall." Is it dumb, sure I think so, but I also see the reason people are upset.

 

[mheslep]

Many Trump supporters don't have good critical thinking skills.

Add this to the list, condescending attacks on the voters instead of the candidate. I suspect such is heard as, "you can not decide who to support with your vote; you will be told who you may or may not support." Received in this way, many might well support the most combative, most bombastic, in your face candidate. Who might that be? Applause to Lisab's OP, for (mostly) not throwing yet more fuel on Trump's "believe me, it'll be great" fire.

 

[Jbunn]

It might be helpful to add: He really isn't all that popular. His polling is mostly due to some 14 odd other Republican candidates splitting the vote, and no clear republican message. His favorability ratings are abysmal. The only candidate with a net positive currently is Bernie.

Anyway, I don't put too much stock into political polls myself to begin with. I worry about Ted Cruz more right now, he is scarier than Trump.
You're trashing peoples critical thinking skills - people you've never met because they don't agree with you. Further, you obviously don't pay attention to the politicians you're criticizing. Trump has repeatedly said he would have mexico pay for the wall. Is this realistic? I don't know. Mexico benefits greatly from trade, so if a lucrative trade deal hinged on them finishing the wall, it would probably get done.

Further, many "immigrants" (See border patrol apprehensions: http://www.pewresearch.org/fact-tan...rehensions-of-mexicans-fall-to-historic-lows/) arrive illegally by crossing the border, not just visas overstays. That's the problem they're trying to fix with "the wall." Is it dumb, sure I think so, but I also see the reason people are upset.

Student100,

When you look at the demographics of Republican support for Trump, he is the strongest among lower income Republicans, and less educated Republicans. As education level goes up, support shifts from Trump to other Republican candidates. My personal opinion is that more educated, more affluent Republican voters do a better job at identifying "bullshit" (google "bullshit detection"). I referred to this as critical thinking, but it's not an attempt to trash people I don't know. Half of people are below average. That's not a dig, just a fact (and a lame joke).

Trump has indeed said that he would have Mexico pay for the wall. Now ask yourself... What power does the president have to demand another country build a wall to protect our interests? Have you considered that Mexico might just say no? Then what? HOW exactly is he going to do this? You are projecting your own problem solving skills with things like "trade deal". Trump didn't say that. He hasn't said anything at all about how to do it. But let's be clear. Mexico is NOT going to pay for a wall. The situation as is is working just fine from their perspective, and the last thing they want is South and Central American refugees trapped in Mexico by a northern wall.

I suggest you read a bit about Sagan's baloney detection kit and apply it to some of Trump's statements.

https://www.brainpickings.org/2014/01/03/baloney-detection-kit-carl-sagan/

 

[Student100]

Actually, Trump did say that.

Do you have any stats for the first claim?

 

[Jbunn]

Actually, Trump did say that.

Do you have any stats for the first claim?

Yes, but you should learn to look things up. Regardless, here's one.

http://www.latimes.com/politics/la-na-donald-trump-support-20151211-story.html

 

[Student100]

Yes, but you should learn to look things up. Regardless, here's one.

http://www.latimes.com/politics/la-na-donald-trump-support-20151211-story.html

I see a survey about how trumps lead among Republican voters with a college degree or more is smaller.

But among those with a college degree or more, Trump’s lead is much smaller. He has 21% of the voters in that group, compared with 19% for Carson, 13% for Rubio, 9% for Cruz and 6% for Bush.

I don't see how this meshes with:

When you look at the demographics of Republican support for Trump, he is the strongest among lower income Republicans, and less educated Republicans

It appears he is also strong among well educated Republicans (leads the demographic and all). I also didn't see anything about wage earnings there, so that's still a dubious claim. Is he strongest among the electorate without college degrees? The survey would suggest that, but then there is the whole:

As education level goes up, support shifts from Trump to other Republican candidates. My personal opinion is that more educated, more affluent Republican voters do a better job at identifying "bullshit" (google "bullshit detection"). I referred to this as critical thinking, but it's not an attempt to trash people I don't know. Half of people are below average. That's not a dig, just a fact (and a lame joke).

Which makes it seem like those who're educated don't support trump. Clearly this is not the case according the survey. Anyway, I don't think you can equate college equation with "critical thinking skills", as though people who didn't graduate college are somehow less capable of intelligent thought. What are you referring to when you say below average? Below average at what? That last bit makes no sense.

 

[meBigGuy]

My very strong opinions follow, I'm just saying it like I think it is:
My country is full of racist bigots who like what Trump says. Simple as that, really. No tolerance for other cultures, other religions, other races, even women.
The underclasses are afraid someone else will get a better deal, or get a leg up on them.
It amazes me how people have been programmed to vote against the very things that would improve their lives.
Trump acts like he represents all that anger, and states it disrespectfully, and that resonates with the angry and misinformed.

 

[Student100]

My very strong opinions follow, I'm just saying it like I think it is:
My country is full of racist bigots who like what Trump says. Simple as that, really. No tolerance for other cultures, other religions, other races, even women.

The US is pretty tolerant, as far as nations go: https://www.washingtonpost.com/news...s-most-and-least-racially-tolerant-countries/

I lived in Japan for a few years, far more xenophobic than the US.

It amazes me how people have been programmed to vote against the very things that would improve their lives.

What're people voting against that would improve their quality of life? If not voting Democratic is a vote against improving your life... that's a bit of a stretch to say the least, don't you think?

 

[russ_watters]

It amazes me how people have been programmed to vote against the very things that would improve their lives.

I read an article recently that describes how Democrats and Republicans think very differently from each other, which makes it hard for them to understand each other. You describe very well the Democratic way of thinking, but apparently don't really have any idea what drives Republicans. The opposite of voting for things that support one's self interest is voting for the good of the country. It's a much more noble aim than you give them (us) credit for. And when really contrasted against each other, the obviousness of the Democratic worldview becomes much less so.

 

[p1l0t]

It's because we are a country divided. Fueled by hate the two-party regime that's been in power since the 1800s will always reign. People feed into the back-and-forth and they love it in some kind of weird S&M fashion almost. It's never going to change unless we change the voting system to end "First Past the Post." Good luck with getting anyone who is in power because of it to vote against it though. And anyway nobody REALLY wants real change they just want to make a choice on red or blue like they are betting on a horse regardless of what they stand for.

 

[russ_watters]

Add this to the list, condescending attacks on the voters instead of the candidate. I suspect such is heard as, "you can not decide who to support with your vote; you will be told who you may or may not support." Received in this way, many might well support the most combative, most bombastic, in your face candidate. Who might that be? Applause to Lisab's OP, for (mostly) not throwing yet more fuel on Trump's "believe me, it'll be great" fire.

I also applaud Lisa's OP: rather than assume people who disagree with you are crazy, racist idiots, ask them (or others who think similarly) what drives them to think the way they do.

 

[StatGuy2000]

I read an article recently that describes how Democrats and Republicans think very differently from each other, which makes it hard for them to understand each other. You describe very well the Democratic way of thinking, but apparently don't really have any idea what drives Republicans. The opposite of voting for things that support one's self interest is voting for the good of the country. It's a much more noble aim than you give them (us) credit for. And when really contrasted against each other, the obviousness of the Democratic worldview becomes much less so.

russ, two questions for you:

1. Does it really make sense to suggest that voting against one's self interest is necessarily the opposite of voting for the good of the country? Is this not contingent on what particular issue is being voted on?

2. What makes you think that Democratic voters don't believe that they are voting for the good of the country as well? One could argue that what Democratic voters think is "good for the country" is different from what Republican voters think.

 

[einswine]

IMO the root of Trump's appeal is his angry simplistic approach to the intractable or nearly intractable difficulties facing the middle class. He has easy answers to problems that appeal to child-level analysis. (http://onpolitics.usatoday.com/2015/10/21/analysis-donald-trump-talks-to-voters-at-a-fourth-grade-level/)

The white middle class is being destroyed both materially and emotionally by politico-economic and technological forces that they don't understand and they are stressed, afraid, distraught, and angry ( Recent decline in life expectancy of the white middle class as best evidence.). Brawn, gumption and being a white “American” are no longer enough to earn a comfortable wage, something felt to be their birthright, and so rage is rising.
(http://www.theatlantic.com/health/archive/2015/11/boomers-deaths-pnas/413971/)

Yes, Trump is part of their problem. And that's the irony. The right, in its most elevated garb, is the siren's song of Aristotelian logic applied to non-Aristotelian categories. Percolate this down to fourth grade analysis, add fearful anger and you get Trump. And a perfect match for one of the least enlightened, chauvinistic segments of the US population which unwittingly embrace many of the agents of their discontents.

Not logical, but all too human.

 

[CalcNerd]

Sadly, there is no real political party for moderates. Both the Republicans and Democrats are extremists (on many of their non-relevant issues anyway). And to win in the primaries means you have to appeal to the base constituents of the party. Does that base represent an electable commodity? Very seldom, so the usual formula is that after you win the primary, you have to adopt the mainstream issues and assure the majority of the population you are really a reasonable fellow (lady), and have now begun to see some of the merits of the other sides arguments (whether you do or not, you need those other lefties, commies, neocons, whatever extra votes where you can get them).
.
Extremists HATE that, and Donald seems to be straight forward and uncompromising and is telling his base he won't bend! That makes him very attractive to elect (for the right wingers). Once he gets that nomination (no guarantee, the republicans have a pretty full clown car), he will then probably have to back peddle (or he has zero chance, the polls show him losing to pretty much any democrat). And Donald has proven that he is a real potential candidate, so I suspect he will quickly grasp (whatever he truly believes, we will not find out until after he is in office) new views and spout off whatever it takes to contrast himself against the democratic nomine, yet be reasonable enough to win.
.
So, while I don't really know who will win this election, I can predict the LOSERS! Us!

 

[Dr_Zinj]

If so, can you 'splain it all to me? No one expected Trump to last.

Most thought that he'd be gone faster than a toupee in a hurricane.

Yet here we are, just weeks from the Iowa caucus -- AND HE'S STILL HERE. Real Clear Politics has Trump and Cruz tied in Iowa (27% each, but it remains to be seen whose supporters will actually turn out to vote). We're all aware that opinion polls and votes are different - but that's OK, because I'm specifically asking about Trump's popularity.

My question is to people who follow US politics: How do you explain Trump's support? What's going on there? The pundits struggle to explain it, which you probably already know if you follow US politics. No denying it: there are people out there who really LOVE the guy. Why? I'm especially interested in what PF conservatives think.


Please read this next part before posting!

All PFers who follow the Current Events forum should know by now how we feel about posting opinions here: you can post your opinion as long as you clearly understand that other people - good, kind, generous, honest, lovely people - may hold the opposite opinion. Adamantly.

So in this thread I'm asking for your opinion - yes you! you good, kind, generous, honest, lovely person, and I ask that you maintain respect for all of us good, kind, generous, honest, lovely people who are posting alongside you.

Lisab:

The best analysis for Trump's success to date, and for his predicted continued success and election to the Presidency, come from Scott Adams, the creator of the Dilbert comic. (http://blog.dilbert.com) He's been predicting a Trump victory ever since The Donald placed his hat in the ring. And he bases his predictions on Trump being a master of verbal persuasion far and above the capabilities of any of the other candidates.

 

[p1l0t]

Sadly, there is no real political party for moderates. Both the Republicans and Democrats are extremists (on many of their non-relevant issues anyway). And to win in the primaries means you have to appeal to the base constituents of the party. Does that base represent an electable commodity? Very seldom, so the usual formula is that after you win the primary, you have to adopt the mainstream issues and assure the majority of the population you are really a reasonable fellow (lady), and have now begun to see some of the merits of the other sides arguments (whether you do or not, you need those other lefties, commies, neocons, whatever extra votes where you can get them).
.
Extremists HATE that, and Donald seems to be straight forward and uncompromising and is telling his base he won't bend! That makes him very attractive to elect (for the right wingers). Once he gets that nomination (no guarantee, the republicans have a pretty full clown car), he will then probably have to back peddle (or he has zero chance, the polls show him losing to pretty much any democrat). And Donald has proven that he is a real potential candidate, so I suspect he will quickly grasp (whatever he truly believes, we will not find out until after he is in office) new views and spout off whatever it takes to contrast himself against the democratic nomine, yet be reasonable enough to win.
.
So, while I don't really know who will win this election, I can predict the LOSERS! Us!

#endFirstPastThePost

 

[Neandethal00]

"why Trump is so popular" ?

The answer is simpler than you think.
Look around you, look around the world.
I'm guessing you read the news daily, not just main stream media,
but online alternative media also. It's a mess.
US economy is not as good as government says, middle class in the USA has
almost evaporated. Wealth is concentrated among 1% of the population (all politicians are
bought by them).
Immigration problem in USA and in Europe.
We started a war 13 years ago, there is no end to the war in sight, in fact
we are ready to open more war fronts, which basically invites terrorists into homeland.

Average Americans are desperate for a change. Career politicians will change nothing, last half century
is the proof. The situation is so bad we are ready to forgive the outrageous flaws of Trump.
Just for a change by a non-politician, an outsider, someone who can not be bought( may be a hope against hope) by 1% wealthy.

Do these reasons answer OP's question?

Disclaimer: I'm Independent. I do not vote and will not vote in 2016.

 

[Devon Fletcher]

Trump's 'popularity' is largely driven by his overt xenophobia, and taps into the issues that trouble many in the GOP. Islam, Mexicans, BHO.
The political system in the USA is fatally flawed, with the real power being wielded by the wealthy donors, who determine where the campaign funds will go.
The end result is an oligarchy, and the real issues (inequality, climate change) are ignored, as the people are swept along in a frenzy of hate.
Candidates must adopt any number of crazy positions, with regard to religion, immigration, science, guns etc., to have a chance of getting the votes.
When some 40% of Americans believe mankind was created by a character from Bronze-age mythology, every candidate is obliged to pretend he believes too.
Democracy is doomed to demagoguery.

 

[Bernie G]

Rush Limbaugh says Trump is popular because he tells other people to go to hell. Like most politicians he is a good salesman and caters to people.