Has "Trumpism" moved beyond Trump to actually trying to destroy the US Democracy?

[F1fan]

Well, Democrats (and up here, Liberals) do tend to believe in very real personal freedom -- meaning not bound even to adhere to party lines. That means that they won't always agree with each other, and thus will have to spend a lot more effort looking for common ground than Republicans (Conservatives, here) must do within their own ranks. For conservatives, sharing values is more important.

Republicans since the 80's have compressed their platform more and more until it is a very rigid and narrow set, and there is very little room for disagreement. On the other hand the platform of the Democrats is very broad, and covers conservatism, through moderate attitudes into liberal views. So Democrats cover a lot more territory and a lot more nuance of any given issue. It's just what comes with a lot of diversity. Republicans are mostly middle class white people. It's pretty easy to get them to agree.

 

[Evangelicalhumanist]

Republicans since the 80's have compressed their platform more and more until it is a very rigid and narrow set, and there is very little room for disagreement. On the other hand the platform of the Democrats is very broad, and covers conservatism, through moderate attitudes into liberal views. So Democrats cover a lot more territory and a lot more nuance of any given issue. It's just what comes with a lot of diversity. Republicans are mostly middle class white people. It's pretty easy to get them to agree.

Yeah -- they all like tuna casserole and hot dogs, but you'd never get them all out trying aloo gobi or chana massala! Chicken fingers (which aren't fingers) are great, but chicken feet at a dim sum brunch (which actually are feet) are out of the question!

 

[F1fan]

Yeah -- they all like tuna casserole and hot dogs, but you'd never get them all out trying aloo gobi or chana massala! Chicken fingers (which aren't fingers) are great, but chicken feet at a dim sum brunch (which actually are feet) are out of the question!

An Indian food fan. You mist be liberal.

 

[F1fan]

Yeah -- they all like tuna casserole and hot dogs, but you'd never get them all out trying aloo gobi or chana massala! Chicken fingers (which aren't fingers) are great, but chicken feet at a dim sum brunch (which actually are feet) are out of the question!

I did eat raw octopus once. And now i can say I've had raw octopus once.

 

[Evangelicalhumanist]

I did eat raw octopus once. And now i can say I've had raw octopus once.

That's how I feel about jellyfish. I ate it. I can say I ate it. It was disgusting (sort of like snot, but funkier). Won't do it again!!

 

[We Never Know]

At $5 an hour 40 years ago it was a decent wage being the minimum wage 40 years ago was only $3.35

@Suave
After further research, the federal minimum wage 40 years ago, in 1971 was only $1.60.

https://www.dol.gov/agencies/whd/minimum-wage/history

 

[Suave]

@Suave
After further research, the federal minimum wage 40 years ago, in 1971 was only $1.60.

History of Changes to the Minimum Wage Law | U.S. Department of Labor

I was just a pee-wee toddler in 1971, It was actually 38.5 years ago when I was detasseling corn in the summer of 1983 at five dollars an hour, which was more than 1.5 times the then minimum wage of $3.35/hour.

 

[We Never Know]

I was just a pee-wee toddler in 1971, It was actually 38.5 years ago when I was detasseling corn in the summer of 1983 at five dollars an hour, which was more than 1.5 times the then minimum wage of $3.35/hour.

Oh crap. I just noticed I gave you $1.60 which was 50 years ago lol. Brain fart

 

[Shaul]

Another pathetic anti-Trump thread. Trump lives in the heads of anti-Trumpers 24/7 rent free.

 

[Heyo]

I find it interesting that the word "fear" appears in most of those reports. Interesting, but not surprising.

Yep. I think US citizens are the most frightened, at least in the developed world.
And that is by design. When you fear for your life, you tend to buy "protection" (guns). When you fear poverty and hunger, you tend to work hard. When you fear your neighbours you tend to have a strong (and expensive) military. When you fear for your freedom, you tend to be critical of anything social.

 

[Evangelicalhumanist]

Another pathetic anti-Trump thread. Trump lives in the heads of anti-Trumpers 24/7 rent free.

Perhaps -- but when you consider that he's raking in a fortune from those who worship his very nether regions, we anti-Trumpers seem to be getting the better deal.

 

[PureX]

I don't really believe US Democrats are extraordinarily "ethical" or "honorable". I think this is more of a testament to their fundamental difference in terms of how either party is structured.

The way I see it as an outsider to US politics, the US Republican party has become a classic European style right-wing populist/xenophobic party, and as such is primarily oriented around building up enemies that their supporter base can rally against. They may shed or re-gain the support of various communities as time goes on (it will certainly be interesting to see whether they can retain the support of both white supremacist and minority conservative factions) but fundamentally, they can keep going like this so long as they can find and maintain acceptable targets to rage and rally against. Trans people may at this point be the most popular choice because they are a tiny minority with no political clout, and there is of course the tried-and-true topic of anti-immigration, which has been successful among European xenophobes as well.

The one danger they're in which you have rightly pointed out is that this program is inherently divisive, and especially with white supremacist rhetoric an element of growing importance, the US Republicans will remain a party for a minority of the population - a substantial minority, mind you, but a minority nonetheless. Even in Europe, where white supremacy is consistently more popular, right-wing xenophobes have only managed to climb into power via coalitions with more established conservative or centrist parties - and the Republicans have been consistently shedding their more centrist elements since Trump came to power. Which leaves voter suppression as one of the few remaining strategies to ensure a Republican victory in regular non-rigged elections.

The US Democratic party, meanwhile, is probably closer to a European-style coalition that has a variety of factional interests to please and keep in line, and a list of policies it needs to enact in order to please each faction in turn. Liberal-conservatives seem to be the dominant faction at this point, and they have a vested interest in keeping the status quo and maintaining friendly ties with fellow liberal-conservatives across the political aisle.

But there are a lot of other factions nominally aligned with the US Democrats who see nothing of value to gain from this, and would rather the party enact policies more in line with their interests - such as welfare state measures for the Social Democratic wing of the party, LGBTQ-friendly measures, more support for minorities etc. - all of these have to be reconciled with what the liberal-conservative establishment wants, and are often in opposition to that.

Which is why the US Democratic party seems to often look like it stands in opposition with itself - because it fundamentally is in opposition with itself, as different factions within the party vie for prominence and try to get their agenda pushed to the forefront and turned into policy.

Keep in mind that I'm not American, so my observations may be wildly off base, but these are the conclusions I've come to while observing American politics for over two decades at this point.

You understand U. S. politics better than most U. S. citizens do. And it is a failure of the two party system that we seem to have fallen into, even though there has never been and mandate for it. The one thing both political parties agree on in the U.S. is that there should be no viable alternatives to theirs. And they have jointly pass laws that make viable alternative parties pretty much impossible.

 

[PureX]

... the US two-party system would render any serious party split a descent into political irrelevancy ...

And that is how our system fails us. Winning becomes more important than any political values, ideals, platforms, or intents. And so, naturally, those become political irrelevancies. Even liabilities.

As I alluded to above, the Republican party can only really get away with it because they are already ideologically united against a common target.

More than just united. They are willing to burn the house down to get their way. And they are proving it every day.

 

[Kooky]

I did eat raw octopus once. And now i can say I've had raw octopus once.

It goes down better with ouzo.

 

[anna.]

Another pathetic anti-Trump thread. Trump lives in the heads of anti-Trumpers 24/7 rent free.

I'd say the winners of the free rent-heads are the Hillary Clinton haters. Ain't nobody gonna top them.

 

[anna.]

I came across this today, and it's perfect for this thread:

 

[Sgt. Pepper]

Perhaps -- but when you consider that he's raking in a fortune from those who worship his very nether regions, we anti-Trumpers seem to be getting the better deal.

If the Republican National Committee is foolish enough to pay 1.6 million dollars of Trump's legal fees, then his loyal supporters deserve to be criticized. Furthermore, if his supporters are willing to donate money to him, knowing full well that he's a lying swindling charlatan, then that's on them and I won't feel sorry for them if (more like 'when') he cheats them out of their money.

Trump has a well known history of being a greedy con-man. He was court-ordered to pay a $25 million settlement to all the people he swindled through his phony business university, and he was court-ordered to pay $250,000 (total of $2 million) to eight different charities, because he misused funds from his Trump Foundation charity.

 

[pearl]

I really think their mission is to save 'white' America, which, of course, would be equivalent to destroying our Republic.

 

[Shaul]

Perhaps -- but when you consider that he's raking in a fortune from those who worship his very nether regions, we anti-Trumpers seem to be getting the better deal.

You really don’t get it. Trump uses the anti-Trumpers. He is getting rich off of you.

 

[anna.]

If the Republican National Committee is foolish enough to pay 1.6 million dollars of Trump's legal fees

This, which I just heard about yesterday, is so telling regarding the RNC, because the RNC isn't paying for legal fees related to his presidency, they're paying for legal fees related to his private businesses.