Are These Trump Supporters the Rule or the Exception?

1. 86

   Sychophantasticposted 7 years ago

   http://www.nationalreview.com/article/4 … p-movement
   
   And do we see this sort of thing on the Left?

   replyreport
   1. 95

      wildernessposted 7 years agoin reply to this

      What do YOU think?  Was your neighbor one of those sending messages?  Your sibling or parent?  Your child's teacher?  The grocery clerk you spoke to yesterday?
      
      Trump supporters come from all points of the compass and from all walks of life and constitute nearly half the nation.  Do YOU think the norm of those millions of people is represented in the link?
      
      Or do you reproduce the link to encourage others to do the same?

      replyreport
      1. 86

         Sychophantasticposted 7 years agoin reply to this

         The link is from the very conservative National Review.

         replyreport
         1. 95

            wildernessposted 7 years agoin reply to this

            I see.  And that means that you think the average, normal Trump follower does these things.  Or does it mean the opposite?  I'm confused.

            replyreport
            1. 86

               Sychophantasticposted 7 years agoin reply to this

               They are the exception, but that such things are happening at all, is extremely disconcerting. That it's the National Review pointing it out of a Republican nominee, is unprecedented.

               replyreport
               1. 95

                  wildernessposted 7 years agoin reply to this

                  That people murder each other is disconcerting, too.  That haters rioted at Trump rallies is extremely disconcerting.  Lots of things disconcerting - that we think no one will ever do evil things is even disconcerting. 
                  
                  But to turn it into a huge deal and blow it all out of proportion is silly.  It is what it is - disgusting childish behavior - and not much more.  God knows we've seen a lot of it this election year.

                  replyreport
                  1. 86

                     Sychophantasticposted 7 years agoin reply to this

                     While it's hard to quantify the level of violence in this year's election or the amount of violent rhetoric, I would submit that this is a fundamentally different type of election. The bulk of Donald Trump's support comes from non-college educated white males. He's also the first candidate to receive and accept support from the alt right movement. He's the first candidate to be almost universally rejected by the mainstream media, including mainstream, established media on the right. His rhetoric is unprecedented in its vitriol. It's also unprecedented for its lack of accuracy. His campaign is a train wreck. Take the "bad hombre" and "nasty woman" comments in the last debate. Had Trump just been able to label Clinton without hitting all women and had he criticized criminals without qualifying them as Mexican, he might have actually won. Had he just pushed his policies and compared his policies to hers, he might have won.
                     
                     Actually, he still might win. There are a few trusted polls that show it as a very tight race.

                     replyreport
                     1. 87

                        GA Andersonposted 7 years agoin reply to this

                        Hello Sychophantastic,
                        About that "fundamentally different type of election" part, you listed "non-college educated white males" first. Why?
                        
                        That description was initially listed as a demographic category, but was quickly picked up and used in a negative sense. It has become a buzz word, a talking point - not an original thought. As a category descriptor it is correct, but as a buzz word it is loaded with more than just being a statistical category.
                        
                        It could be that you meant they were a vote that hadn't turned out in the past. Or, as a category description like "women." Or, you could have meant they were too dumb to vote intelligently. I would peg your intent as the latter.
                        
                        Back to the "fundamentally different..." part; I recall there have been several elections that were described similarly by folks of the time. Not worth the research to back that up, but coincidentally I just read a page of my current read that describes the 1936 election;
                        ["FDR A Biography" by Ted Morgan]
                        
                        "In this election year of 1936, [2016], whoever the Republican candidate was, people would be voting either for or against FDR, [Clinton]. "
                        
                        "... But never had FDR, [Clinton], been under such intensely personal attacks."
                        
                        "They went on about socialism, and a planned economy, and Rex the Red, and confiscatory taxes, and the decay of the spirit of self-reliance..."
                        
                        As I was reading the section that included those quotes, I thought that with just date and name substitutions it was a fairly accurate description of our 2016 election.
                        
                        GA

                        replyreport
                        1. 0

                           ahorsebackposted 7 years agoin reply to this

                           Except,  sorely lacking then  was the existence of TODAYS  media , both mainstream and social .    To compare   now and then is apples and oranges .   Todays election is a  political phenomena given the incredible power of both the new media and the powers of perception of the voting public.     
                           
                           The only constant ; perhaps the  naiveté of the young and the uninformed voter .

                           replyreport
                           1. 76

                              Castlepalomaposted 7 years agoin reply to this

                              They vote for the person of caricature , not of characteristics.

                              replyreport
                        2. 86

                           Sychophantasticposted 7 years agoin reply to this

                           Trump's main body of support are white people who haven't been to college. A recent CNN poll has him leading with that group 62% to 32%. All that statistic suggests is that Trump's supporters are less educated than Hillary's supporters, I guess.
                           
                           As for the election itself, it is true that there is usually an inordinate amount of hyperbole in any election. Certainly, the 1936 was also a very specific kind of election where people were voting for FDR's expanding, centralized federal government or not. And there have also been many elections with quite a bit of vitriol. I suppose it's worth studying to see if this one is beyond normal or not.

                           replyreport
                           1. 95

                              wildernessposted 7 years agoin reply to this

                              "All that statistic suggests is that Trump's supporters are less educated than Hillary's supporters, I guess."
                              
                              Perhaps that should be modified to Trump's supporters have less classroom education?  I suspect that they are far more knowledgeable about how to build or fix their home, how to repair their car and keep it running, how to grow a garden, how to hunt their own food, etc.  How to live on their own, in other words, without using the skills of others to perform ordinary, everyday tasks.  Education takes many forms, yes?

                              replyreport
                              1. 86

                                 Sychophantasticposted 7 years agoin reply to this

                                 Good point. However, I think a college education helps people in many ways. It usually broadens one's understanding of how the world works, for instance. And a broader understanding of how the world works usually results in a less fearful attitude toward the world.

                                 replyreport
                                 1. 95

                                    wildernessposted 7 years agoin reply to this

                                    Really?  My experience both of college and of it's graduates do not support that how the world works is to be found there at all.  Only in real life experience is the truth of how the world works to be found; colleges (mostly) deal only in liberal dreams when it comes to that.  Dreams like "If we give away free money to people it will make them want to support themselves", or "We have unlimited funding available from the rich to carry out our charity programs with".  The world doesn't work that way, but it is the kind of concept college promotes today.

                                    replyreport
                                    1. 86

                                       Sychophantasticposted 7 years agoin reply to this

                                       I don't believe colleges promote any such thing. Generally, colleges teach basic skills in how to learn and understand complex concepts. A liberal arts education provides a wide range of education on various topics, like history, science, math, geology, geography; etc. I've never seen a single class taught about giving away money. I'm sure that an understanding of climate change is quite a bit higher among the college educated as a result of learning how to interpret data and how scientists reach conclusions.

                                       report
                                       1. 95

                                          wildernessposted 7 years agoin reply to this

                                          So?  How many colleges and universities have a very decided liberal bent and philosophy vs how many are conservative? 
                                          
                                          A while back, counselling was made available to the poor students that were upset by Trump slogans scrawled on sidewalks with chalk.  Now another is giving counselling for those upset by halloween costumes.  Do these things, you think, teach how the world works?  Or how to depend on someone else for the most minor of things?

                                          report
                                    2. 86

                                       Sychophantasticposted 7 years agoin reply to this

                                       Colleges don't teach liberalism or the following of any political philosophy, that I know of. Are you talking about the political leanings of the faculty?
                                       
                                       Generally, colleges aren't microcosms of how the world works because they're working to transition high school students, who have lived at home with their parents, to functioning, independent adults. That's not always smooth because those students come from such wide backgrounds.

                                       report
                                       1. 95

                                          wildernessposted 7 years agoin reply to this

                                          "Are you talking about the political leanings of the faculty?"
                                          
                                          Yes.  And the administration.  And the student body.  I'd hazard that of the people that work or learn on our university campuses 90% are liberal.  You can find conservative campuses (primarily religious ones) but they are pretty rare and haven't but a tiny percentage of the overall student population.
                                          
                                          And no, they aren't microcosms of how the world works: they are hotbeds of liberal thought.  Which is why they can't truly teach how the world works!  A student that is pounded with liberal actions, thoughts and policies 10 hours a day and conservative ones for 30 minutes isn't going to be a conservative and isn't going to understand or care what makes a conservative tick.

                                          report
                                    3. 86

                                       Sychophantasticposted 7 years agoin reply to this

                                       Hotbeds of liberal thought? Really? If that's true, what are the causes, do you think?
                                       
                                       You actually think that students are pounded with liberal actions, thoughts, and policies 10 hours a day? Like what?
                                       
                                       This assessment of higher education is ridiculous and false and pretty much a product of right-wing propaganda. But let's say it's not. Why do you think that higher education is not a place where conservatives flock? Is it full of liberals because liberals are more interested in teaching or because there's a built in liberal bias that rejects conservatism and conservatives?

                                       report
                                       1. 95

                                          wildernessposted 7 years agoin reply to this

                                          You talk as if you've not been to college and have not associated with many students.  Have you no experience with neither?

                                          report
                                    4. 86

                                       Sychophantasticposted 7 years agoin reply to this

                                       That's a strange response and also inaccurate. I get the impression that you're just repeating rhetoric you've heard somewhere about colleges being hotbeds of liberal thought. I'm just asking for some evidence because I don't know what you are referring to specifically.
                                       
                                       What does a conservative college curriculum look like? What's taught? What does a conservative science class teach?
                                       
                                       I'm really more interested in whether you believe that liberals comprise the majority of teachers for a reason or whether the environment encourages faculty to become liberals.
                                       
                                       One easy explanation is that most students these days require some form of assistance to attend college and much of that is government assistance due to the cost of college. So, in a way, they're indoctrinated from the very beginning to believe that government should play a role in their lives through financial support.

                                       report
      2. 56

         Alternative Primeposted 7 years agoin reply to this

         Actually, to be PERFECTLY Honest, the VAST Majority of the SHRINKING Group of "Trumpeteers" are COMPRISED Primarily of RURAL, "OFF the GRIDERs", Older Uneducated WHITE Men, "END-Timer Prepers" who need an INSANE Reckless President like TRUMP to Start the APOCALYPSE so all that money spent on that UNDERGROUND Shelter, Radios & DRIED Rations won't go to WASTE ~
         
         He also ATTRACTs the Klu Klux KLANsMen who ROBO-Call for him & a FEW Christians who are FINALLY Begining to "SEE the LIGHT" as it RELATEs to "Abuser Trump" and are starting to REJECT him ~ Looks like that "Access HOLLYWOOD Tape" & Emerging LIST of ACCUSSERs was the ABSOLUTE Final Straw for them, better LATE than NEVER I guess ~
         
         HARDCORE "Trump FANz" Represent a Very TINY MInority of AMERICANs who if they are as INTELLIGENT as they Claim, will Swiftly "DISSIPATE" shortly after "SWINDLER Donald" ATTEMPTs to "MONETIZE" them which he is trying to do Right Now, or when he's DESTROYED on November 8, 2016 ~ Whichever comes FIRST ~
         
         The TRUMP  "Pseudo CAMPAIGN" has ALIENATED just about everyone ELSE not ONLY in this "GREAT COUNTRY", but Globally ~
         
         "NATIONAL Disgrace" as General Colin Powell "BRANDED" him as, is a SEVERE Under-Statement for this "Dangerously RECKLESS CLOWN-Show" Jackass ~

         replyreport
   2. 0

      Onusonusposted 7 years agoin reply to this

      I'm more concerned about these violent Hillary supporters.
      https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=LjalRqifvf0

      replyreport
   3. 69

      wrenchBiscuitposted 7 years agoin reply to this

      
      
      According to the historical record, a record which many here on Hubpages seem to purposely avoid, those you are referring to as "Trump Supporters", are simply good ol' Americans. The slogan "Make America Great Again" is simply code for "Make America White Again". And this is a notion that is quite appealing to  white Americans on both sides of the aisle. The notion of the United States being a great "melting pot" is not so appealing to the average white voter once they finally realize that melting pot = multiculturalism = truth = America was never "great" in the first place. It is simply another country created by greedy landowners to satisfy their carnal lust for wealth,power, flesh, and blood.
      
      Even though Planned Parenthood has been doing their best to kill as many black babies as possible in order to keep the black population at  acceptable levels, and even though the U.S. government successfully exterminated a majority of the Northern Indigenous populations years ago, there is a problem south of the border. My Indigenous brothers and sisters south of the border are very strong in numbers, and such numbers threaten white supremacy on a national, and a global level. There is also a Muslim problem across the sea.  And the Muslim problem has nothing to do with terrorism, since much of the so-called terrorist activity has been created and funded by the United States. The Muslim problem is the same as the Indigenous problem to the south. The increasing number of Muslims, namely those of Middle Eastern descent, is also a threat to white supremacy, and has been since before the Crusades.
      
      Donald Trump and Hillary Clinton have put on a good show, but they are both on the same team. "SuperPredator" Hillary, and "Grab 'em by the Taco" Donald, fundamentally have the same agenda, and that is to maintain white supremacy. And just like their predecessors, they will use any means necessary to accomplish that goal.The current election cycle is just another poorly written episode of "Good Cop-Bad Cop". It is as hypocritical of Clinton supporters to condemn aggressive Trump supporters as it was for Northerners to condemn slave-owners in the South. Although slavery had been abolished in all Northern States by 1804, the North was still economically dependent on the institution of slavery, especially the textile industry.
      
      And although Hillary isn't talking about building a wall, she has actively been engaged in destabilizing the Middle East, she has helped to create the refugee crisis in Syria, and she is indirectly responsible for the deaths of tens of thousands of human beings. My advice to Americans: Be what you are, be an American, and forget about the lesser of two evils, because when it comes to maintaining the status quo there is no such thing. Just go ahead and pick your poison.

      replyreport
      1. 76

         Castlepalomaposted 7 years agoin reply to this

         Good summary.

         replyreport
         1. 0

            ahorsebackposted 7 years agoin reply to this

            Except its simply says" Look at the racist , bigoted , stupid , Trump supporters guys !
            
            HOW SHALLOW !

            replyreport
            1. 76

               Castlepalomaposted 7 years agoin reply to this

               Is Trump a deep thinker?

               replyreport
               1. 0

                  ahorsebackposted 7 years agoin reply to this

                  Is Hilary an intellectual !

                  replyreport
   4. 72

      rhamsonposted 7 years agoin reply to this

      You have been seduced by the propaganda machine of this perverted election cycle. From people stealing signs from their neighbors lawns to throwing crowds into bedlam and violence is it the candidates fault on either side? Are the candidates to blame for the ignorance we choose to commit on each other? Are we not the nation of freedom of speech sans the repercussions? Are we not responsible for our own actions? How many times have you heard the defense of either candidate that they don't care for their choice but the other one is worse? This is all our fault as the strings for the re-election of Congress are being pulled while we sleep in the face of it happening. We all are puppets while the elite moneyed interests continue their greed filled domination over us all. Maybe we are just too stupid for self rule. Maybe it is best after all.

      replyreport
      1. 76

         Castlepalomaposted 7 years agoin reply to this

         After enough morlocks have eaten us up. People will wake up and take control again,do have fate. Many do feel like they only going faster in the treadmill.

         replyreport
   5. 60

      Live to Learnposted 7 years agoin reply to this

      I didn't look at your link. I will say that I do give Hillary supporters the benefit of the doubt and assume you are the exception.

      replyreport
2. 89

   IslandBitesposted 7 years ago

   "I oppose Trump not just because he’s an ignorant demagogue and a naked political opportunist, but also because bigotry and intimidation cling to his campaign. Every campaign attracts its share of fools, cranks, and crazies. But Trump’s candidacy has weaponized them."
   
   

   replyreport
3. 0

   ahorsebackposted 7 years ago

   When ever I look at Hilary  , I think  How Can An Intellectual  be so Stupid?

   replyreport
   1. 72

      rhamsonposted 7 years agoin reply to this

      Or sly like a fox.

      replyreport
   2. 76

      Castlepalomaposted 7 years agoin reply to this

      Hillary dose have a higher IQ, because she can remember her lies and has better prepared excuses for them.
      
      No one in my life I've heard has multi layer contradiction and fights with everybody including Trump himself.
      
      Trump lies more, since most often the best lair win, he has a chance. Also Trump  knows what many people are screaming at their TV Sets about.
      
      No matter who wins we all loose.

      replyreport
      1. 56

         Alternative Primeposted 7 years agoin reply to this

         Here in the REAL-World, OUTSIDE the Confines of "FOX Loser Network", We WIN Big if Hillary is ELECTED & Would Have ENDANGERED the ENTIRE Planet if "Delusional Donald" had ever succeeded with his "INSANE Pseudo-Campaign" of HATE, Misogyny, Racism, Deranged Ideas & Subversive PLANs etc ~

         replyreport
4. 49

   Caprice Ciaraposted 7 years ago

   What exactly is liberal? Social? Economic? I think everyone has a different definition of the term.

   replyreport
5. 93

   jo millerposted 7 years ago

   Whether they are the exception or the rule, they should be condemned by the person at the top of that ticket, by other members of the Republican Party and by Trump supporters who find this behavior despicable.  And if those folks don't speak out against such behavior then I think it's fair to assume it's the rule.

   replyreport