Sam Harris on Why People Vote for trump

[Tambourine]

Liberals forget that whatever they think of as horrifying failures, the people who support Trump think of as great successes.

He's saving America from Communism, protecting Christianity, promoting the Free Market etc. what have you, with whatever methods necessary. The people who oppose him are therefore evil no matter what.

 

[Beenthere Donethat]

Liberals make people feel guilty? And conservatives don't?

Before Trump it was the other way around, the conservatives were all about morality and family values!

 

[bobhikes]

One view....
We don't live with a President. So they can be personally insufferable.
We pick them to effect better policies than the others running for the job.
Sometimes this means that an awful person is a better choice for that
job than the competition.
People who voted for Biden should understand that.

Which is exactly how Hitler and every other dictator rose to power because human's are always willing to give up on morality to achieve a better perceived policy. Any policy that by passes morality will never be good. Don't get me wrong I have problems with Biden as well just not as grievous as Trump. Again with the 2 party system we are suppressing morals to achieve policy and this needs to be corrected as well.

 

[Revoltingest]

Which is exactly how Hitler and every other dictator rose to power because human's are always willing to give up on morality to achieve a better perceived policy.

Hitler doesn't stand alone exemplifying the popular miscreant.
Recent Presidents include Nixon, Clinton, Trump, & now Biden.
Mayors & governors provide copious examples too.

Any policy that by passes morality will never be good. Don't get me wrong I have problems with Biden as well just not as grievous as Trump. Again with the 2 party system we are suppressing morals to achieve policy and this needs to be corrected as well.

You raise a question.
Which is better/worse?
1) A miscreant who pursues better policies, eg, peace, liberty.
2) A saint who pursues bad policies, eg, war, oppression to
achieve security.

I observe that the answer will vary because there are 2
fundamentally different kinds of voters, who lean strongly
one way or the other....
A) Those who look to a leader as a moral example.
B) Those who want policies a leader would effect in office.

I find that type A voters cannot understand
type B views when the candidate is loathsome.

 

[DagonVarunaMitraApolloZan]

Of the Trump voters I know, it's about the good
of the country far more than personal benefit.

That is even better than I thought! I was thinking of "the good of the country" as "the good of myself and my family", but it is actually interesting if they might think that "my family and myself may suffer, but "the country" will benefit" (which doesn't totally make sense to me, because to me a country is made up of all these families and people and so what is good for them is good for the country and a country having a good time).

I like that they present it as a kind of self-less re-wording in what you described (and I doubt many people would easily admit that they do simply what they think will make their lives easier or better overall).

What you are saying is no-doubt true that they would say it that way that they did in particular, and they want to broaden their scope of interests to include issues where they are perhaps not directly impacted, like keeping out the Mexicans or whatever. They might want to give Trump a few extra years to finish the superheated wall of death to keep out the Mexicans (which I don't mind at all, I want some "Great Wall of America" as a new tourist sight).

 

[Revoltingest]

That is even better than I thought! I was thinking of "the good of the country" as "the good of myself and my family", but it is actually interesting if they might think that "my family and myself may suffer, but "the country" will benefit" (which doesn't totally make sense to me, because to me a country is made up of all these families and people and so what is good for them is good for the country and a country having a good time).

I like that they present it as a kind of self-less re-wording in what you described (and I doubt many people would easily admit that they do simply what they think will make their lives easier or better overall).

What you are saying is no-doubt true that they would say it that way that they did in particular, and they want to broaden their scope of interests to include issues where they are perhaps not directly impacted, like keeping out the Mexicans or whatever. They might want to give Trump a few extra years to finish the superheated wall of death to keep out the Mexicans (which I don't mind at all, I want some "Great Wall of America" as a new tourist sight).

I find that people generally believe that's what good for the
country is also good for them. Some issues are clearly so,
eg, a strong economy. Some are indirect, eg, gay marriage.

"Superheated wall of death"?
I don't think Trump supporters don't see it that way.

 

[bobhikes]

Hitler doesn't stand alone exemplifying the popular miscreant.
Recent Presidents include Nixon, Clinton, Trump, & now Biden.
Mayors & governors provide copious examples too.

You raise a question.
Which is better/worse?
1) A miscreant who pursues better policies, eg, peace, liberty.
2) A saint who pursues bad policies, eg, war, oppression to
achieve security.

I observe that the answer will vary because there are 2
fundamentally different kinds of voters, who lean strongly
one way or the other....
A) Those who look to a leader as a moral example.
B) Those who want policies a leader would effect in office.

I find that type A voters cannot understand
type B views when the candidate is loathsome.

I consider a saint who pursues war and oppression as morally wrong as well. Just because others define things as saintly doesn't make them so. My moral standards deal with treating all humans with respect even those I don't agree with.

 

[Revoltingest]

I consider a saint who pursues war and oppression as morally wrong as well.

But pursuit of war can be done with a smile & proper behavior.
Obama violated his campaign promise to end them, & instead
pursued them.
Trump is a truly unendurable person, yet he's started no wars.
(Of course, he still posed a risk. It just wasn't realized.)

 

[bobhikes]

But pursuit of war can be done with a smile & proper behavior.
Obama violated his campaign promise to end them, & instead
pursued them.
Trump is a truly unendurable person, yet he's started no wars.
(Of course, he still posed a risk. It just wasn't realized.)

My point is not how people can be bad but how people need to stand by there morals. I am an independent voter because I refuse to sacrifice my morals for my politics. So what if I don't pick the next president, I have voted for the person I felt best.

 

[Revoltingest]

My point is not how people can be bad but how people need to stand by there morals. I am an independent voter because I refuse to sacrifice my morals for my politics. So what if I don't pick the next president, I have voted for the person I felt best.

When picking a politician, one often faces a choice where
both have moral failings. We then pick the least worst.

 

[bobhikes]

When picking a politician, one often faces a choice where
both have moral failings. We then pick the least worst.

You keep saying both as if you only have 2 choices. You have infinite choices you can even vote for yourself. You'll say but I have no chance of winning, and I say it shouldn't be about winning. It should be the best person for the job whoever they are. The party system blinds the public into submission. Winning defeats all other values.

 

[Revoltingest]

You keep saying both as if you only have 2 choices.

Once the primaries are done, only 2 candidates have any chance
of winning. But I chose otherwise this time (Jorgensen).

You have infinite choices you can even vote for yourself. You'll say but I have no chance of winning, and I say it shouldn't be about winning. It should be the best person for the job whoever they are. The party system blinds the public into submission. Winning defeats all other values.

Most of the time I knowingly vote for a loser (Libertarian).

 

[Augustus]

nteresting, short audio clip from Sam harris.

My inelegant summary is: Liberals make people feel guilty, trump doesn’t.

If someone took 4 years to work out why people voted for Trump over Clinton despite pondering it continuously then it's definitely not worth listening to them now

Trump won for the same reason Obama won - he told a better story

 

[Augustus]

Fortunately there are still so many true patriots who recognize all the good things Donald Trump has accomplished for people of color, immigrants, LGBT people, and religious minorities.

I've not followed closely enough to be certain on this so may be wrong, but didn't he do better with most of these demographics than he did last time?

If I'm wrong, I'm wrong. If not, why is this the case?

 

[icehorse]

If someone took 4 years to work out why people voted for Trump over Clinton despite pondering it continuously then it's definitely not worth listening to them now

Trump won for the same reason Obama won - he told a better story

but the point is that after 4 years of seeing the dumpster fire in action, 70 million people STILL voted for him

 

[Revoltingest]

but the point is that after 4 years of seeing the dumpster fire in action, 70 million people STILL voted for him

It's understandable. Biden is a poor alternative.

 

[Evangelicalhumanist]

It's understandable. Biden is a poor alternative.

But may well be just what the nation needs right now. I find him to be less rabidly partisan than so many others in your politics. He's a veteran senator, who knows really well how to to negotiate across the floor to achieve an outcome that can potentially work for everybody -- but usually doesn't change too much too radically.

Wouldn't you enjoy a rest, after the last 4 years?

 

[Revoltingest]

But may well be just what the nation needs right now. I find him to be less rabidly partisan than so many others in your politics. He's a veteran senator, who knows really well how to to negotiate across the floor to achieve an outcome that can potentially work for everybody -- but usually doesn't change too much too radically.

Wouldn't you enjoy a rest, after the last 4 years?

I don't let presidential antics bother me.

 

[Saint Frankenstein]

I've not followed closely enough to be certain on this so may be wrong, but didn't he do better with most of these demographics than he did last time?

If I'm wrong, I'm wrong. If not, why is this the case?

I noticed a number of black people running as Republicans in local races, more than I've ever seen. There's been an increase of new faces in elections since Trump, people never involved in politics before. Many Latinos, especially those who escaped Marxism, are very conservative and support Trump. So I'm sure that's correct.