Listening to the concerns of the other political side...

[arkieb1]

This is taken from something called factcheck.org called -The Real Deal on the Global Financial Crisis in the US;

So who is to blame? There’s plenty of blame to go around, and it doesn’t fasten only on one party or even mainly on what Washington did or didn’t do. As The Economist magazine noted recently, the problem is one of "layered irresponsibility … with hard-working homeowners and billionaire villains each playing a role." Here’s a partial list of those alleged to be at fault:

The Federal Reserve, which slashed interest rates after the dot-com bubble burst, making credit cheap.
Home buyers, who took advantage of easy credit to bid up the prices of homes excessively.
Congress, which continues to support a mortgage tax deduction that gives consumers a tax incentive to buy more expensive houses.
Real estate agents, most of whom work for the sellers rather than the buyers and who earned higher commissions from selling more expensive homes.
The Clinton administration, which pushed for less stringent credit and downpayment requirements for working- and middle-class families.
Mortgage brokers, who offered less-credit-worthy home buyers subprime, adjustable rate loans with low initial payments, but exploding interest rates.
Former Federal Reserve chairman Alan Greenspan, who in 2004, near the peak of the housing bubble, encouraged Americans to take out adjustable rate mortgages.
Wall Street firms, who paid too little attention to the quality of the risky loans that they bundled into Mortgage Backed Securities (MBS), and issued bonds using those securities as collateral.
The Bush administration, which failed to provide needed government oversight of the increasingly dicey mortgage-backed securities market.
An obscure accounting rule called mark-to-market, which can have the paradoxical result of making assets be worth less on paper than they are in reality during times of panic.
Collective delusion, or a belief on the part of all parties that home prices would keep rising forever, no matter how high or how fast they had already gone up.

The U.S. economy is enormously complicated. Screwing it up takes a great deal of cooperation. Claiming that a single piece of legislation was responsible for (or could have averted) the crisis is just political grandstanding. We have no advice to offer on how best to solve the financial crisis. But these sorts of partisan caricatures can only make the task more difficult.
–by Joe Miller and Brooks Jackson

I've just highlighted the parts that I find most relevant. Both sides in part, are responsible for the economic conditions that cause the GFC, and before another historian amongst you jumps in and says oh but x or y caused it back in the 70s, I've read those theories too, the point is when x or y (the left or the right) did something in any fixed point in your history that helped to in part cause the GFC, the next political party (both sides) didn't rock the boat, didn't step outside their comfort zones to reign in credit, didn't reign in how much your financial institutions were willing to loan both overseas and domestically, didn't adequately control regulators and bankers. And subsequently didn't do enough (couldn't or wouldn't) to try and cushion what subsequently occurred.

Therefore, in part, both sides are guilty of economic mismanagement and both failed at various points in time to adequately put in place enough safeguards, enough regulations, and enough cushions, before, during and after the GFC. If we move on from blaming the other side for the GFC, because lets face it, that won't undo what occurred, it is going to be more productive for us to discuss how Trump is going to "fix" your economy.

He promised during his campaign to create more jobs (and so many Americans drank that cool aid, bought in to what he was offering), and to adopt what I would describe as a set of policies heavily based upon the ideals of protectionism. So what we should be discussing is will this work in your current political climate - why or why not - why one side sees him as your economic saviour and the other sees him as potentially creating even more long term damage.

 

[arkieb1]

Hi,

I call myself center left. Both choices for Pres were bad. Both parties must be accountable for better candidates. While I voted Hillary, I did have to reflect on what Trump was offering. The things he said resonated with me as well. We NEED border control. Its beyond believability that we have 11 million illegal immigrants here; 6.8 million Mexicans. The financial burden on smaller municipalities is huge. Yes, many work but local Govt pay for services. (medical, social services).

Thank you Anette for adding a more balanced political point of view.

Although we have reached almost full employment, there are industries that have suffered through the relocation of manufacturing jobs,(autos pay well) and there are segment of the population that would be helped by the return of those jobs, even secondary level jobs in telephone banks might help.

I'm not sure if that is indeed possible, all of the data I've read suggests that all of our economies globally have moved away from manufacturing jobs because of technology, the statisticians concur that the biggest expanding base of jobs in the future will be in very different areas to manufacturing. IT (information technology) will be the largest and areas like health, education, and people who provide services that cater to people who are time poor are all said to be where the jobs of the future will be.... So rather than resurrecting industries in the manufacturing sectors that are no longer financially sustainable long term, perhaps we should be doing more to retrain the unemployed and our young people, in areas that are expanding.

Trump, for example says he will limit foreign imports and will create more domestic employment by bringing back these manufacturing jobs, I see why people out of work and out of hope think this is a great idea, on paper more jobs in the short term at least is going to be good for your economy. In the long term however, as any basic economist will tell you, what this will do is push up the price of manufactured goods. In Australia for example we have much higher salaries, (which probably sounds good) except that your $25.00USD pair of Levis here costs $90.00AUD to over $100AUD ($68.25 USD to $75.85) for the same pair of jeans. Domestic protectionism is going to create short term jobs, but it's also going to push up the price of manufactured goods, which in turn will create inflation, which in turn could create the same set of conditions that lead to the GFC in the first place. You do not currently have a high enough wage structure and a tax system that distributes wealth fairly enough to sustain higher inflation or a substantially increased cost of living....

So, there are areas where I support Trump, and if I have time will do so later to list others.

My concern is that both the far right and the far left are the ones that are making the noises that will hurt democracy. While I believe that "messy" is Ok in a democracy, I do believe too much dissent can turn into anarchy or total paralysis. An autocrat can arise. I think both far right and far left are the cause for this awful situation.

Yes I complete agree.

This forum veers on hysteria at times. This is a great country, but when I read here, I wonder.

Arkie, I really have wondered about you. I fear at times the liberals here are not giving you an accurate picture of America.

Annette that would only matter if I didn't have the ability to objectively view that picture for myself. I think being an outsider is both a blessing and a curse, yes I don't live with the same set of frustrations and issues you do, but on the flip side of that, that despite my own political preferences being outside that bubble, perhaps affords me a higher level of objectivity to not only read or hear, but grasp where both sides are coming from...

We really have come a long way.

Annette

 

[bunnycat]

Hi,

I call myself center left. Both choices for Pres were bad. Both parties must be accountable for better candidates. While I voted Hillary, I did have to reflect on what Trump was offering. The things he said resonated with me as well. We NEED border control. Its beyond believability that we have 11 million illegal immigrants here; 6.8 million Mexicans. The financial burden on smaller municipalities is huge. Yes, many work but local Govt pay for services. (medical, social services).

Thank you Anette for adding a more balanced political point of view.

Although we have reached almost full employment, there are industries that have suffered through the relocation of manufacturing jobs,(autos pay well) and there are segment of the population that would be helped by the return of those jobs, even secondary level jobs in telephone banks might help.

I'm not sure if that is indeed possible, all of the data I've read suggests that all of our economies globally have moved away from manufacturing jobs because of technology, the statisticians concur that the biggest expanding base of jobs in the future will be in very different areas to manufacturing. IT (information technology) will be the largest and areas like health, education, and people who provide services that cater to people who are time poor are all said to be where the jobs of the future will be.... So rather than resurrecting industries in the manufacturing sectors that are no longer financially sustainable long term, perhaps we should be doing more to retrain the unemployed and our young people, in areas that are expanding.

Trump, for example says he will limit foreign imports and will create more domestic employment by bringing back these manufacturing jobs, I see why people out of work and out of hope think this is a great idea, on paper more jobs in the short term at least is going to be good for your economy. In the long term however, as any basic economist will tell you, what this will do is push up the price of manufactured goods. In Australia for example we have much higher salaries, (which probably sounds good) except that your $25.00USD pair of Levis here costs $90.00AUD to over $100AUD ($68.25 USD to $75.85) for the same pair of jeans. Domestic protectionism is going to create short term jobs, but it's also going to push up the price of manufactured goods, which in turn will create inflation, which in turn could create the same set of conditions that lead to the GFC in the first place. You do not currently have a high enough wage structure and a tax system that distributes wealth fairly enough to sustain higher inflation or a substantially increased cost of living....

So, there are areas where I support Trump, and if I have time will do so later to list others.

My concern is that both the far right and the far left are the ones that are making the noises that will hurt democracy. While I believe that "messy" is Ok in a democracy, I do believe too much dissent can turn into anarchy or total paralysis. An autocrat can arise. I think both far right and far left are the cause for this awful situation.

Yes I complete agree.

This forum veers on hysteria at times. This is a great country, but when I read here, I wonder.

Arkie, I really have wondered about you. I fear at times the liberals here are not giving you an accurate picture of America.

Annette that would only matter if I didn't have the ability to objectively view that picture for myself. I think being an outsider is both a blessing and a curse, yes I don't live with the same set of frustrations and issues you do, but on the flip side of that, that despite my own political preferences being outside that bubble, perhaps affords me a higher level of objectivity to not only read or hear, but grasp where both sides are coming from...

We really have come a long way.

Annette

Here is an article on the growing rift in American political views. It does not boil down to a simple "y'all just need to get along". Rifts have been developing for decades among the mainstream moving away from Centrism. People have rejected Centrism. Yes, extremism of any sort can lead to an autocrat....and so here we are.

http://www.people-press.org/2014/06/12/political-polarization-in-the-american-public/

http://www.people-press.org/2016/04/26/a-wider-ideological-gap-between-more-and-less-educated-adults/

 

[arkieb1]

A quote from your own first article;

"These sentiments are not shared by all – or even most – Americans. The majority do not have uniformly conservative or liberal views. Most do not see either party as a threat to the nation. And more believe their representatives in government should meet halfway to resolve contentious disputes rather than hold out for more of what they want."

What the writer and you to a degree are arguing is that there has been an increasing divide in the number of people who have views towards the far left and far right, I get that part, I understand it, I get the second article too which statistically confirms people that move towards the left to be statistically more educated while those on the far right less educated - what Annette was pointing out, rather well, is there are still plenty of Americans left in the middle, they are still plenty of Americans on either side of that middle line, that may vote differently but many of them share the same concerns. I'd go so far to say that Trump himself is even more polarising, the whole point of this discussion is to allow people to express their concerns and why they have them. I agree, that in part the reason your society has allowed Trump to indeed become so popular is because not enough people on the left were willing to listen to and validate the concerns of those on the right..... Table from second article;

 

[the_mother_thing]

I've been slammed with work all day (still finishing up), but had a few minutes here and there to at least start a reply to Arkie, and I just popped in quick while taking a break.

To clarify - is this a "help me understand you" kind of individual-perspective dialogue, or is it regurgitating the same blame-game arguments and links from CNN, NY Times, etc. to make/prove one's point about how wrong the other is?

And I really don't mean that as rudely as it reads (long day & going on 3 hrs of sleep). But I do want to be clear so I understand the goal & can decide how much effort (if any) to put forward; I just don't care to get into yet another election/candidate whizzing contest, IYKWIM.

 

[arkieb1]

No this is a I want to hear your opinion, if I write back it will be I don't agree with you because of x or y, or I do agree with you because of x and y, but, I'm trying to understand your point of view, hopefully you are trying to understand mine. If others want to add to this fine, if it ends in name calling etc like the other threads I myself will ask for it to be taken down. But I sincerely hope it won't come to that.

 

[the_mother_thing]

No this is a I want to hear your opinion, if I write back it will be I don't agree with you because of x or y, or I do agree with you because of x and y, but, I'm trying to understand your point of view, hopefully you are trying to understand mine. If others want to add to this fine, if it ends in name calling etc like the other threads I myself will ask for it to be taken down. But I sincerely hope it won't come to that.

Thank you! I appreciate the clarification (and your not taking my question/wording how it probably sounded).

 

[ruby59]

No this is a I want to hear your opinion, if I write back it will be I don't agree with you because of x or y, or I do agree with you because of x and y, but, I'm trying to understand your point of view, hopefully you are trying to understand mine. If others want to add to this fine, if it ends in name calling etc like the other threads I myself will ask for it to be taken down. But I sincerely hope it won't come to that.

Thank you! I appreciate the clarification (and your not taking my question/wording how it probably sounded).

For some of us, every time we try to give our opinion, even share a part of our life, we are met with either a condescending pat on the head, pictures of vomit or downright nastiness.

No one here listens unless you parrot the left party line.

 

[arkieb1]

No this is a I want to hear your opinion, if I write back it will be I don't agree with you because of x or y, or I do agree with you because of x and y, but, I'm trying to understand your point of view, hopefully you are trying to understand mine. If others want to add to this fine, if it ends in name calling etc like the other threads I myself will ask for it to be taken down. But I sincerely hope it won't come to that.

Thank you! I appreciate the clarification (and your not taking my question/wording how it probably sounded).

For some of us, every time we try to give our opinion, even share a part of our life, we are met with either a condescending pat on the head, pictures of vomit or downright nastiness.

No one here listens unless you parrot the left party line.

I could probably argue there have been times when you have been guilty of the same thing, I'm stating openly I'm willing to step outside my comfort zone and see the world from your eyes, BUT, I expect some level of you doing the same thing in return. I agree there have been many nasty unnecessary comments made on both sides, I've also seen what I would refer to as "baiting" from both sides too. If you like I'm happy to preface the discussion going forward that there is to be no vomiting icons, no eye rolling icons and no intentionally stating things purely for the sake of getting a negative reaction, or to personally attack or demean the other person.

 

[smitcompton]

Hi,

I am going to continue to write my other areas of support of Trumps policies, but first I want to thank everyone so far for respecting one anothers" opinion. Tekate, we are basically in agreement. So in order to continue to clarify my thought, I must say that it is Trump himself that is the problem, not all his policies. This is an important point for me.

We need an overhaul of the tax system. We have the highest corporate tax rate of all the western nations. Other nations subsidize their exports so that the US Corp. is at a disadvantage. This is necessary to compete in the world. We may be able to achieve this because the Pres & Congress are willing to do this now. Individuals need reductions as well.

Regulations stymie and slow business down. Deregulation, in some areas, will be good. Dodd Frank will not be dismantled, but some regs will be removed. I just read the Fed is not introducing any new regs now.

Arkie, Your list of causes of much of the turmoil we face, is one of the best I have seen. Good work in posting it.

I have one problem that I am unsure I should share but I think I will because it shows that the international uproar of our immigration policy can be very one sided

Aurstralia has a policy of no refugee resettlements in your country. You put them on 2 islands and try to send them elsewhere, like to the US. We still have the best refugee policy in the world.

A nurse I know is expecting her sister to come to the US this spring. She has been waiting 10 yrs to get her visa. She is from the Phillipines and has both parents here, a sister and a brother. 11 million people came here before her.

Annette

 

[partgypsy]

I think that sometimes people who are Pro-Trump think that the only reason why people are anti-Trump is because of 2), which then goes into tit for tat arguments about hey this person said something offensive, or you are an ugly feminist, wimpy snowflake etc. However that is ignoring the more real compelling reasons why many people, the majority of US citizens are anti-trump.

1) Ideology/issues. I'm glad someone brought up about how the political climate, has become even more divisive and splintered, where our elected officials, rather than listening to the majority views (which fall in the moderate range) are voting along pretty ideologically extreme lines.
To give you an example of how extreme the Republicans have gotten, here is a debate between Reagan and Bush discussing illegal immigration. Honestly if you didn't know who was talking and just read the transcript they would probably be accused of being clueless liberals. Also note that the language is to unite versus dividing people. Find commonalities.
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Ixi9_cciy8w
There will always be ideologic and issues differences between the two parties and two candidates. But the name-calling and personal attacks on the other side, has made it so the government cannot function. I also disagree with him nominating appointees that do not represent the majority view, and frankly do not have the qualifications for the job, but only fit due to their ideological extremism or financial ties/influence.

2) There are those who dislike Trump as a person, personality, his comments, and his sexism. I personally don't hate Trump (there are very few people I hate). I don't think he is a pleasant person, but there have been some abrasive people as president. My worry is that his prelidictions show he is not willing to represent and support all US citizens, including women.

3) There are many who feel that he is tempermentally unfit for office, for many many reasons. There is speculation that he has some form of personality disorder such as malignant narcissism.
https://warontherocks.com/2016/03/open-letter-on-donald-trump-from-gop-national-security-leaders/

and 4) which is the most worrying to me, is that Trump's brief time in office seems to indicate he does not have respect for the honors, customs and responsibilities of the presidential office (including removing conflicts of interest), and has a tenuous grasp on what a Democracy is (free speech, checks and balances, and freedom from religious persecution) among others. while we may argue about issues, we should not be so distracted with individual issues to overlook the fact that Trump seems to be veering our democracy to a far right shift, by dividing and conquering people's hearts and minds. I think we can all agree we are all US citizens we are afforded equal rights under the law, and we do not want to live in a country controlled by a small number of people. Can we agree on that?

 

[t-c]

A quote from your own first article;

"These sentiments are not shared by all – or even most – Americans. The majority do not have uniformly conservative or liberal views. Most do not see either party as a threat to the nation. And more believe their representatives in government should meet halfway to resolve contentious disputes rather than hold out for more of what they want."

What the writer and you to a degree are arguing is that there has been an increasing divide in the number of people who have views towards the far left and far right, I get that part, I understand it, I get the second article too which statistically confirms people that move towards the left to be statistically more educated while those on the far right less educated - what Annette was pointing out, rather well, is there are still plenty of Americans left in the middle, they are still plenty of Americans on either side of that middle line, that may vote differently but many of them share the same concerns. I'd go so far to say that Trump himself is even more polarising, the whole point of this discussion is to allow people to express their concerns and why they have them. I agree, that in part the reason your society has allowed Trump to indeed become so popular is because not enough people on the left were willing to listen to and validate the concerns of those on the right..... Table from second article;

What concerns are these, exactly? These generalities bother me.

1. Illegal immigration - there were more deportations, arrests and detentions, and punishments of employers hiring illegals during the Obama administration than in any other administrations. In fact, while illegal immigration actually went UP during the W. Bush years, it leveled off during the Obama years. So what exactly do the people on the right want -- a

2. Oh, and they want to ban people from coming in to the US because they are afraid of terrorists. Well, were we attacked during the Obama administration. One can say yes to that (Lanza in Newtown, Mateen in Orlando, Farook and Malik in San Bernardino, Roof in North Carolina, Tsarnaev in Boston, etc...), but guess what, those terrorists were citizens of the US. Even the ones who weren't born here didn't come from Iraq, Iran, Syria, Yemen, Sudan, Somalia, Libya. But the right want to ban the muslims anyway.

3. Loss of manufacturing jobs. I posted a Financial Times article here that says for the past 20 years, manufacturing has shed jobs because of automation. The manufacturing output of the US has increased during that time, and they're doing it with a lot less people. I also posted an article from the NYTimes that says that even if we can tempt manufacturers to come to the US, the current workforce mostly cannot meet the reading/writing/math/reasoning requirements of new production plants. Obama emphasized (re)training. But the right wants protectionism and trade wars (of course they don't realize that this will have deep repercussions throughout the world that will eventually hit them hard in the wallet, but hey, ignorance is bliss).

I think these are the three big issues. It seems to me that they were being addressed by the previous government. It seems to me the right just didn't like how they were being addressed. They want more extreme, more punitive, more belligerent policies. Why? I don't know, but it seems to me that they are driven by fear and they want the country to make policies that reflect those fears.

 

[bunnycat]

A quote from your own first article;

"These sentiments are not shared by all – or even most – Americans. The majority do not have uniformly conservative or liberal views. Most do not see either party as a threat to the nation. And more believe their representatives in government should meet halfway to resolve contentious disputes rather than hold out for more of what they want."

What the writer and you to a degree are arguing is that there has been an increasing divide in the number of people who have views towards the far left and far right, I get that part, I understand it, I get the second article too which statistically confirms people that move towards the left to be statistically more educated while those on the far right less educated - what Annette was pointing out, rather well, is there are still plenty of Americans left in the middle, they are still plenty of Americans on either side of that middle line, that may vote differently but many of them share the same concerns. I'd go so far to say that Trump himself is even more polarising, the whole point of this discussion is to allow people to express their concerns and why they have them. I agree, that in part the reason your society has allowed Trump to indeed become so popular is because not enough people on the left were willing to listen to and validate the concerns of those on the right..... Table from second article;

What concerns are these, exactly? These generalities bother me.

1. Illegal immigration - there were more deportations, arrests and detentions, and punishments of employers hiring illegals during the Obama administration than in any other administrations. In fact, while illegal immigration actually went UP during the W. Bush years, it leveled off during the Obama years. So what exactly do the people on the right want -- a

2. Oh, and they want to ban people from coming in to the US because they are afraid of terrorists. Well, were we attacked during the Obama administration. One can say yes to that (Lanza in Newtown, Mateen in Orlando, Farook and Malik in San Bernardino, Roof in North Carolina, Tsarnaev in Boston, etc...), but guess what, those terrorists were citizens of the US. Even the ones who weren't born here didn't come from Iraq, Iran, Syria, Yemen, Sudan, Somalia, Libya. But the right want to ban the muslims anyway.

3. Loss of manufacturing jobs. I posted a Financial Times article here that says for the past 20 years, manufacturing has shed jobs because of automation. The manufacturing output of the US has increased during that time, and they're doing it with a lot less people. I also posted an article from the NYTimes that says that even if we can tempt manufacturers to come to the US, the current workforce mostly cannot meet the reading/writing/math/reasoning requirements of new production plants. Obama emphasized (re)training. But the right wants protectionism and trade wars (of course they don't realize that this will have deep repercussions throughout the world that will eventually hit them hard in the wallet, but hey, ignorance is bliss).

I think these are the three big issues. It seems to me that they were being addressed by the previous government. It seems to me the right just didn't like how they were being addressed. They want more extreme, more punitive, more belligerent policies. Why? I don't know, but it seems to me that they are driven by fear and they want the country to make policies that reflect those fears.

I was looking at more info on the immigration topic. In studies done during the O years you are right, (illegal) immigration leveled off. There were declines from Mexico, but increases shifted to other parts of the world. I also read through an immigrations lawyer's essay on immigration, and WHY so many people immigrate "illegally". There are only 2 ways to get a visa. One is by marrying, and the other through immediate family. The current waitlist for people marrying in is 2 years. The current waitlist for others is anywhere from 7-24 years....Apparently for people who have siblings in the US and are on the application waitlist, they are currently reviewing applications from 1997. No right or wrong answer, just saying one reason why it happens.

On loss of manufacturing. That America where you could have a good job for your whole life just out of HS simply doesn't exist anymore....

 

[arkieb1]

Hi,

I am going to continue to write my other areas of support of Trumps policies, but first I want to thank everyone so far for respecting one anothers" opinion. Tekate, we are basically in agreement. So in order to continue to clarify my thought, I must say that it is Trump himself that is the problem, not all his policies. This is an important point for me.

That, in part, is why I started this thread I see so much vitriol when the truth is that a lot of conservative voters don't actually like Trump either.

We need an overhaul of the tax system. We have the highest corporate tax rate of all the western nations. Other nations subsidize their exports so that the US Corp. is at a disadvantage. This is necessary to compete in the world. We may be able to achieve this because the Pres & Congress are willing to do this now. Individuals need reductions as well.

I looked up your corporate tax rates compared to Australia's and in 2014 yours was 40% ours was 30% - I agree yours is probably too high link to source;
http://theconversation.com/factcheck-is-australias-corporate-tax-rate-not-competitive-with-the-rest-of-the-region-37226

Interestingly there are always calls here to make ours higher, we have much higher personal tax rates here and more taxes on other things so when those are calculated out we pay more taxes overall than you do. I can't get this to upload into here but here are the links, please look at this;

http://d3bo5ucoqkgs8h.cloudfront.net/nZhaR/2/

And the article it came from;

ttp://www.abc.net.au/news/2015-11-17/fact-check-tax-rate-vs-the-oecd-scott-morrison/6925134

The point I wish to make is the 4 countries that pay more taxes overall as a society (both personal and corporate combined) have better health, better education and better welfare systems than some of the countries that pay less taxes. They also curiously enough are usually listed as the most "liveable" and more pleasing places to live as well.

Are you arguing that you don't subsidise your industries compared to other countries? This simply isn't true. Australia farmers for example have long been at a disadvantage because we subsidise our agricultural industry way less than you do



We do subsidise our mining industry but again if we take coal as one example we also subsidise the coal industry less than you do link;

http://www.smh.com.au/federal-politics/political-news/australia-given-more-than-4-billion-in-foreign-subsidies-for-coal-projects-report-20150601-ghe807.html

This is the key problem to what you are arguing, your country is currently massively in debt and you need viable sources to pay that debt off, I agree on paper at least you do seem to have high corporate tax rates, but if these were cut where is the money going to come from to replace that revenue source? You have average personal tax rates compared to the rest of the world (they are much lower than ours for example)



Both should obviously be on sliding scales, the wealthy pay more personal tax and big businesses that make more profits should pay more tax on those profits. Australians pay too much personal tax, we all know it, we all complain about it, but I guess deep down we know that it helps sustain a certain quality of lifestyle that we enjoy here.

Regulations stymie and slow business down. Deregulation, in some areas, will be good. Dodd Frank will not be dismantled, but some regs will be removed. I just read the Fed is not introducing any new regs now.

Specific examples?

Arkie, Your list of causes of much of the turmoil we face, is one of the best I have seen. Good work in posting it.

I have one problem that I am unsure I should share but I think I will because it shows that the international uproar of our immigration policy can be very one sided

Aurstralia has a policy of no refugee resettlements in your country. You put them on 2 islands and try to send them elsewhere, like to the US. We still have the best refugee policy in the world.

Yes this is true, there has been a huge furore in the media here yesterday because Obama signed a agreement to take some of them and Trump now doesn't want them. For once, I understand Trump's point of view. To say we have a no refugee resettlements in Australia is incorrect, we do but they HAVE to come here legally. We have a no tolerance policy to illegal immigrants, not only because of the same concerns many of you have against illegal immigration but also largely in part this was a reaction to the human rights issue of people drowning on boats trying to come here.

http://theconversation.com/factcheck-did-1200-refugees-die-at-sea-under-labor-38094

There was a huge call from many people in our society to stop or turn back the boats to stop women and children dying, so our conservative government introduced legislation that anyone picked up off a boat or that comes here illegally is detained on the two Islands you mentioned and either sent home or resettled somewhere else (often in non desirable places) this has indeed stopped many people from wanting to come here illegally. The actual conditions on Manis Island and Nauru and the way we treat these people raise a whole set of human rights issues in itself. I could write a lengthy summary on what I personally think about it but the condensed version is I believe some of the people have been treated inhumanely and some of them do in fact deserve to be resettled here. Our current government doesn't agree with me. So the basic gist is we are not anti immigration we believe that people wishing to come here should take a number and get in line so to speak and not jump the queue.

A nurse I know is expecting her sister to come to the US this spring. She has been waiting 10 yrs to get her visa. She is from the Phillipines and has both parents here, a sister and a brother. 11 million people came here before her.

Annette

 

[arkieb1]

I think that sometimes people who are Pro-Trump think that the only reason why people are anti-Trump is because of 2), which then goes into tit for tat arguments about hey this person said something offensive, or you are an ugly feminist, wimpy snowflake etc. However that is ignoring the more real compelling reasons why many people, the majority of US citizens are anti-trump.

Yes, I agree and as stated in my reply to Annette I think a lot of moderate conservatives don't like Trump either.

1) Ideology/issues. I'm glad someone brought up about how the political climate, has become even more divisive and splintered, where our elected officials, rather than listening to the majority views (which fall in the moderate range) are voting along pretty ideologically extreme lines.
To give you an example of how extreme the Republicans have gotten, here is a debate between Reagan and Bush discussing illegal immigration. Honestly if you didn't know who was talking and just read the transcript they would probably be accused of being clueless liberals. Also note that the language is to unite versus dividing people. Find commonalities.
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Ixi9_cciy8w
There will always be ideologic and issues differences between the two parties and two candidates. But the name-calling and personal attacks on the other side, has made it so the government cannot function. I also disagree with him nominating appointees that do not represent the majority view, and frankly do not have the qualifications for the job, but only fit due to their ideological extremism or financial ties/influence.

Yes I think we both agree on that, the left are just more vocal about it, and perhaps rightly so because really honestly some of those people should not be there, including Trump himself.

2) There are those who dislike Trump as a person, personality, his comments, and his sexism. I personally don't hate Trump (there are very few people I hate). I don't think he is a pleasant person, but there have been some abrasive people as president. My worry is that his prelidictions show he is not willing to represent and support all US citizens, including women.

Yes entirely true.

3) There are many who feel that he is tempermentally unfit for office, for many many reasons. There is speculation that he has some form of personality disorder such as malignant narcissism.
https://warontherocks.com/2016/03/open-letter-on-donald-trump-from-gop-national-security-leaders/

Again also true, the International press is having a field day, I don't think you have ever had a more incoherent, more self absorbed president.

and 4) which is the most worrying to me, is that Trump's brief time in office seems to indicate he does not have respect for the honors, customs and responsibilities of the presidential office (including removing conflicts of interest), and has a tenuous grasp on what a Democracy is (free speech, checks and balances, and freedom from religious persecution) among others. while we may argue about issues, we should not be so distracted with individual issues to overlook the fact that Trump seems to be veering our democracy to a far right shift, by dividing and conquering people's hearts and minds. I think we can all agree we are all US citizens we are afforded equal rights under the law, and we do not want to live in a country controlled by a small number of people. Can we agree on that?

I completely agree, I think he will end up doing something so unconstitutional either members of his own party or your citizens will call for him to be impeached.

 

[t-c]

Hi,

I am going to continue to write my other areas of support of Trumps policies, but first I want to thank everyone so far for respecting one anothers" opinion. Tekate, we are basically in agreement. So in order to continue to clarify my thought, I must say that it is Trump himself that is the problem, not all his policies. This is an important point for me.

That, in part, is why I started this thread I see so much vitriol when the truth is that a lot of conservative voters don't actually like Trump either.

We need an overhaul of the tax system. We have the highest corporate tax rate of all the western nations. Other nations subsidize their exports so that the US Corp. is at a disadvantage. This is necessary to compete in the world. We may be able to achieve this because the Pres & Congress are willing to do this now. Individuals need reductions as well.

I looked up your corporate tax rates compared to Australia's and in 2014 yours was 40% ours was 30% - I agree yours is probably too high link to source;
http://theconversation.com/factcheck-is-australias-corporate-tax-rate-not-competitive-with-the-rest-of-the-region-37226

Interestingly there are always calls here to make ours higher, we have much higher personal tax rates here and more taxes on other things so when those are calculated out we pay more taxes overall than you do. I can't get this to upload into here but here are the links, please look at this;

http://d3bo5ucoqkgs8h.cloudfront.net/nZhaR/2/

And the article it came from;

ttp://www.abc.net.au/news/2015-11-17/fact-check-tax-rate-vs-the-oecd-scott-morrison/6925134

The point I wish to make is the 4 countries that pay more taxes overall as a society (both personal and corporate combined) have better health, better education and better welfare systems than some of the countries that pay less taxes. They also curiously enough are usually listed as the most "liveable" and more pleasing places to live as well.

Are you arguing that you don't subsidise your industries compared to other countries? This simply isn't true. Australia farmers for example have long been at a disadvantage because we subsidise our agricultural industry way less than you do



We do subsidise our mining industry but again if we take coal as one example we also subsidise the coal industry less than you do link;

http://www.smh.com.au/federal-politics/political-news/australia-given-more-than-4-billion-in-foreign-subsidies-for-coal-projects-report-20150601-ghe807.html

This is the key problem to what you are arguing, your country is currently massively in debt and you need viable sources to pay that debt off, I agree on paper at least you do seem to have high corporate tax rates, but if these were cut where is the money going to come from to replace that revenue source? You have average personal tax rates compared to the rest of the world (they are much lower than ours for example)



Both should obviously be on sliding scales, the wealthy pay more personal tax and big businesses that make more profits should pay more tax on those profits. Australians pay too much personal tax, we all know it, we all complain about it, but I guess deep down we know that it helps sustain a certain quality of lifestyle that we enjoy here.

Regulations stymie and slow business down. Deregulation, in some areas, will be good. Dodd Frank will not be dismantled, but some regs will be removed. I just read the Fed is not introducing any new regs now.

Specific examples?

Arkie, Your list of causes of much of the turmoil we face, is one of the best I have seen. Good work in posting it.

I have one problem that I am unsure I should share but I think I will because it shows that the international uproar of our immigration policy can be very one sided

Aurstralia has a policy of no refugee resettlements in your country. You put them on 2 islands and try to send them elsewhere, like to the US. We still have the best refugee policy in the world.

Yes this is true, there has been a huge furore in the media here yesterday because Obama signed a agreement to take some of them and Trump now doesn't want them. For once, I understand Trump's point of view. To say we have a no refugee resettlements in Australia is incorrect, we do but they HAVE to come here legally. We have a no tolerance policy to illegal immigrants, not only because of the same concerns many of you have against illegal immigration but also largely in part this was a reaction to the human rights issue of people drowning on boats trying to come here.

http://theconversation.com/factcheck-did-1200-refugees-die-at-sea-under-labor-38094

There was a huge call from many people in our society to stop or turn back the boats to stop women and children dying, so our conservative government introduced legislation that anyone picked up off a boat or that comes here illegally is detained on the two Islands you mentioned and either sent home or resettled somewhere else (often in non desirable places) this has indeed stopped many people from wanting to come here illegally. The actual conditions on Manis Island and Nauru and the way we treat these people raise a whole set of human rights issues in itself. I could write a lengthy summary on what I personally think about it but the condensed version is I believe some of the people have been treated inhumanely and some of them do in fact deserve to be resettled here. Our current government doesn't agree with me. So the basic gist is we are not anti immigration we believe that people wishing to come here should take a number and get in line so to speak and not jump the queue.

A nurse I know is expecting her sister to come to the US this spring. She has been waiting 10 yrs to get her visa. She is from the Phillipines and has both parents here, a sister and a brother. 11 million people came here before her.

Annette

The US may have high statutory corporate income tax rates, but that isn't necessarily what corporations pay. There are so many deductions and loopholes that many (who employ decent tax lawyers) end up paying very low and even no taxes. Very like our current president; it is deduced, from the leaked section of his tax return (because, of course, he never released it) that he could have gone decades without paying a cent in income taxes.

 

[bunnycat]

Thanks arkie- for writing such a thorough and thoughtful reply. I am always interested to see the underside of things you wouldn't commonly see here (without digging).

I wondered about the no immigration policy and why it might be the case. Thanks also for the bit of understanding about your tax structure and the links.

You made a comment earlier about thinking that the US didn't/doesn't invest enough in it's citizens. That's a deep and multilayered subject, much like every other topic is in a in a country with so many people and with no black or white answer and that can't be reduced to simplistic terms, but my gut instinct says you are probably right....

So I see it repeatedly said (pretty much everywhere I look) this dissatisfaction is some result of extremists intolerance. In reality, I am very pragmatic when it comes to governance. I know and understand that my views lean a certain way (liberal, pretty obviously) yet also understand that for a country the size of ours, governance by extremists/extremism is generally not workable and tend to prefer moderate Centrists (of either variety) in positions of power since that's really the only way compromise happens. So, what is so very scary, is that people I know that I do not consider extreme in their political views, and have never even seen them post anything political, now are paying attention to the same distressing signs I see as well. So, perhaps before someone makes a blanket statement about extreme liberals being dissatisfied and causing problems, it may actually be that people who have moderate liberal views, are polarizing now...just a thought...or their polarization is like mine, directed at this particular example when in reality, they prefer a moderate view....

 

[arkieb1]

A quote from your own first article;

"These sentiments are not shared by all – or even most – Americans. The majority do not have uniformly conservative or liberal views. Most do not see either party as a threat to the nation. And more believe their representatives in government should meet halfway to resolve contentious disputes rather than hold out for more of what they want."

What the writer and you to a degree are arguing is that there has been an increasing divide in the number of people who have views towards the far left and far right, I get that part, I understand it, I get the second article too which statistically confirms people that move towards the left to be statistically more educated while those on the far right less educated - what Annette was pointing out, rather well, is there are still plenty of Americans left in the middle, they are still plenty of Americans on either side of that middle line, that may vote differently but many of them share the same concerns. I'd go so far to say that Trump himself is even more polarising, the whole point of this discussion is to allow people to express their concerns and why they have them. I agree, that in part the reason your society has allowed Trump to indeed become so popular is because not enough people on the left were willing to listen to and validate the concerns of those on the right..... Table from second article;

What concerns are these, exactly? These generalities bother me.

I'm not disagreeing with you these are things I keep hearing or see written by conservatives, that they feel left out, unheard, I'm guessing in part by who they view as political elites, Hillary referring to some sections of voters as "the deplorables" this did nothing to bridge this gap, but I too am interested on hearing why many conservatives feel this way...

1. Illegal immigration - there were more deportations, arrests and detentions, and punishments of employers hiring illegals during the Obama administration than in any other administrations. In fact, while illegal immigration actually went UP during the W. Bush years, it leveled off during the Obama years. So what exactly do the people on the right want -- a

Agreed, and the other thing is that the Mexican economy is actually doing O.K at the moment there are jobs there so a lot of people don't actually want to leave Mexico for American any more.... The next point I would make is even if Trump does build a wall subsequent governments will probably abandon the use of it, you have fences and border patrols now anyway, so realistically I can't help wondering if it is nothing more than a glorified symbol against both legal and illegal immigration.

2. Oh, and they want to ban people from coming in to the US because they are afraid of terrorists. Well, were we attacked during the Obama administration. One can say yes to that (Lanza in Newtown, Mateen in Orlando, Farook and Malik in San Bernardino, Roof in North Carolina, Tsarnaev in Boston, etc...), but guess what, those terrorists were citizens of the US. Even the ones who weren't born here didn't come from Iraq, Iran, Syria, Yemen, Sudan, Somalia, Libya. But the right want to ban the muslims anyway.

Statistically you are all more likely to get killed in an armed robbery at a shop, or your kids get killed by some pissed off socially rejected young white guy than you ever will be by a person who is a Muslim, so no arguments from me, but once again I'm interested to hear why when statistically these fears are so unfounded so many people believe in them.

3. Loss of manufacturing jobs. I posted a Financial Times article here that says for the past 20 years, manufacturing has shed jobs because of automation. The manufacturing output of the US has increased during that time, and they're doing it with a lot less people. I also posted an article from the NYTimes that says that even if we can tempt manufacturers to come to the US, the current workforce mostly cannot meet the reading/writing/math/reasoning requirements of new production plants. Obama emphasized (re)training. But the right wants protectionism and trade wars (of course they don't realize that this will have deep repercussions throughout the world that will eventually hit them hard in the wallet, but hey, ignorance is bliss).

See my above comments to Annette on that very same thing, I think we have moved away, evolved, moved on from an Industrial society to a Technology based, heavily serviced based society, and pining for the good old days isn't going to bring them back again. Again read my comments to Annette above on trade and protectionism, I too get why it's economically going to be bad long term

I think these are the three big issues. It seems to me that they were being addressed by the previous government. It seems to me the right just didn't like how they were being addressed. They want more extreme, more punitive, more belligerent policies. Why? I don't know, but it seems to me that they are driven by fear and they want the country to make policies that reflect those fears.

I do and I don't agree with you, yes I think in part, for some people it is fear, but I also think in part it's a reaction against a failing economy, a failing social system, a system that many feel has failed them personally. Hopefully more conservatives on here will add their thoughts, and without personal attacks if you want a better insight into those answers then we should read them carefully and actually listen to those concerns, even if we disagree.

 

[arkieb1]

Thanks arkie- for writing such a thorough and thoughtful reply. I am always interested to see the underside of things you wouldn't commonly see here (without digging).

I wondered about the no immigration policy and why it might be the case. Thanks also for the bit of understanding about your tax structure and the links.

You made a comment earlier about thinking that the US didn't/doesn't invest enough in it's citizens. That's a deep and multilayered subject, much like every other topic is in a in a country with so many people and with no black or white answer and that can't be reduced to simplistic terms, but my gut instinct says you are probably right....

So I see it repeatedly said (pretty much everywhere I look) this dissatisfaction is some result of extremists intolerance. In reality, I am very pragmatic when it comes to governance. I know and understand that my views lean a certain way (liberal, pretty obviously) yet also understand that for a country the size of ours, governance by extremists/extremism is generally not workable and tend to prefer moderate Centrists (of either variety) in positions of power since that's really the only way compromise happens. So, what is so very scary, is that people I know that I do not consider extreme in their political views, and have never even seen them post anything political, now are paying attention to the same distressing signs I see as well. So, perhaps before someone makes a blanket statement about extreme liberals being dissatisfied and causing problems, it may actually be that people who have moderate liberal views, are polarizing now...just a thought...or their polarization is like mine, directed at this particular example when in reality, they prefer a moderate view....

If I had to make an objective observation I'd say you were right but the reason for this is that Trump himself and the people he has chosen to make up the political "Trump team" are in themselves responsible for this polarisation you describe, they don't represent politics in the middle, so therefore they are getting more backlash from the left. I don't think that it's just a fact that more people wanted to suddenly adopt more left wing or right wing or more radical beliefs in either direction, I think he is the core of why this happened. The lefties like me believe he simply shouldn't be there and rightly or wrongly many on the right need to defend their party or their decision to put him there. I get the impression there are extreme conservatives that love him and share many of the same views but for every one of them there are more middle of the line conservatives that voted against Hillary or that voted for a change or a shake up too. I'm sure there are people that could have voted either way but wanted to vote for something different to see if that brought about some sort of social and more importantly economic change.

 

[arkieb1]

t-c - that is something our government has done systematically, cracked down on both corporate and personal "loopholes" to ensure a more equitable tax system for all. This is something I don't and probably won't ever understand, so many far right voters claim they voted for Trump because he represents the voice of the common man, of the neglected, yet the simple truth is he is a rich white guy who is going to do jack about closing so many of these 'loopholes" that benefit him and his rich buddies and disadvantage everyone else. In fact I would even go so far as to say he will introduce corporate measures or will lift some regulations that will no doubt end up lining his pocket and the pockets of other already wealthy business people.

 

[jaaron]

I'm sorry others feel they are 'suffering', but I and many others made it through eight years of worrying about this country, its direction, feeling ignored or marginalized, questioning if our leadership mistook the constitution for toilet paper;

I'm genuinely interested in the answer to this- not trying to be confrontational or provocative - Can you give me some examples of the above?[/quote]

Sorry- I think I'm too late to edit. Just to clarify- I was specifically wondering about the mistaking the constitution bit.[/quote]

The first quote was from JoCoJenn- Is there anyone who's interested in helping me understand how the last administration did this?

 

[bunnycat]

I'm sorry others feel they are 'suffering', but I and many others made it through eight years of worrying about this country, its direction, feeling ignored or marginalized, questioning if our leadership mistook the constitution for toilet paper;

I'm genuinely interested in the answer to this- not trying to be confrontational or provocative - Can you give me some examples of the above?

Sorry- I think I'm too late to edit. Just to clarify- I was specifically wondering about the mistaking the constitution bit.[/quote]

The first quote was from JoCoJenn- Is there anyone who's interested in helping me understand how the last administration did this?[/quote]


Here's a link to some of it. There's plenty more out there but it is on patently partisan sites so take your grain of salt with you if you dive in...

http://www.factcheck.org/2014/07/obama-and-executive-overreach/

 

[bunnycat]

Thanks arkie- for writing such a thorough and thoughtful reply. I am always interested to see the underside of things you wouldn't commonly see here (without digging).

I wondered about the no immigration policy and why it might be the case. Thanks also for the bit of understanding about your tax structure and the links.

You made a comment earlier about thinking that the US didn't/doesn't invest enough in it's citizens. That's a deep and multilayered subject, much like every other topic is in a in a country with so many people and with no black or white answer and that can't be reduced to simplistic terms, but my gut instinct says you are probably right....

So I see it repeatedly said (pretty much everywhere I look) this dissatisfaction is some result of extremists intolerance. In reality, I am very pragmatic when it comes to governance. I know and understand that my views lean a certain way (liberal, pretty obviously) yet also understand that for a country the size of ours, governance by extremists/extremism is generally not workable and tend to prefer moderate Centrists (of either variety) in positions of power since that's really the only way compromise happens. So, what is so very scary, is that people I know that I do not consider extreme in their political views, and have never even seen them post anything political, now are paying attention to the same distressing signs I see as well. So, perhaps before someone makes a blanket statement about extreme liberals being dissatisfied and causing problems, it may actually be that people who have moderate liberal views, are polarizing now...just a thought...or their polarization is like mine, directed at this particular example when in reality, they prefer a moderate view....

If I had to make an objective observation I'd say you were right but the reason for this is that Trump himself and the people he has chosen to make up the political "Trump team" are in themselves responsible for this polarisation you describe, they don't represent politics in the middle, so therefore they are getting more backlash from the left. I don't think that it's just a fact that more people wanted to suddenly adopt more left wing or right wing or more radical beliefs in either direction, I think he is the core of why this happened. The lefties like me believe he simply shouldn't be there and rightly or wrongly many on the right need to defend their party or their decision to put him there. I get the impression there are extreme conservatives that love him and share many of the same views but for every one of them there are more middle of the line conservatives that voted against Hillary or that voted for a change or a shake up too. I'm sure there are people that could have voted either way but wanted to vote for something different to see if that brought about some sort of social and more importantly economic change.

I think some of it is also ingrained "reflex" as it were. I live in a DEEPLY conservative state. The majority if my family is deeply conservative. My own father is conservative but did not like trump... however he has voted conservative all his life....and no matter how much I explained and how much he agreed with me...he couldn't bring himself to vote any other way. At best, he may have left the president spot blank...but party line everywhere else, even though I try to tell him that because of the things he believes he's really not actually a conservative....there are lots of people in this country just like that....

 

[arkieb1]

I think some of it is also ingrained "reflex" as it were. I live in a DEEPLY conservative state. The majority if my family is deeply conservative. My own father is conservative but did not like trump... however he has voted conservative all his life....and no matter how much I explained and how much he agreed with me...he couldn't bring himself to vote any other way. At best, he may have left the president spot blank...but party line everywhere else, even though I try to tell him that because of the things he believes he's really not actually a conservative....there are lots of people in this country just like that....

This is exactly why I started this thread/post. What you are articulating here is really important. This is what I was trying to explain, probably badly over on the other page about my mother, I would have loved to have seen how she voted in your election if she was a US citizen, because I asked her and she said and I quote "I'd never vote for Trump because I don't trust him, I think he is a slimeball" but I would then go on to say that her political views her political bias is entrenched, so that means she would have been forced to do three things, vote for the Republican party but not Trump himself specifically (or for other people where the vote still ultimately went to the Republican party), do what Dancing Fire and a few others claim they did and not vote at all, or change her political beliefs that she has held all of her life and voted for Hillary. I don't think option 3 would have been a viable option for her if she was placed in those circumstances, so therefore she and many Americans who don't like, trust or didn't want to vote for Trump himself are still left with options 1 and option 2.

Your father echoes the same sentiment I heard from Dancing Fire on here, they couldn't bring themselves to vote for Hillary for a number of complex reasons. One of my mother's close friends who shares many similar views is a duel US and Australian citizen and my mother said she openly admitted voting for Trump. This woman is a lovely lady probably nearly 80 who would do anything for anyone, so I think it's too simplistic when we label all of Trump's supporters as fitting a profile of being mainly racist white working class men, some of them are, some of them hold extreme points of view, but many of his voters (as opposed to his devout supporters) simply do not fit that profile.

 

[Matata]

arkie...have you seen any of these? I've briefly scanned them. Other than the Pew study, I couldn't find, using the same casual search delimiters as I did for trump info, anything that goes in-depth about Clinton supporters. That is likely due to the fact that she lost.

http://www.pewresearch.org/fact-tank/2016/10/20/6-charts-that-show-where-clinton-and-trump-supporters-differ/

This one claims authoritarianism is the single defining trait of trump supporters.
http://www.politico.com/magazine/story/2016/01/donald-trump-2016-authoritarian-213533

https://www.washingtonpost.com/news/wonk/wp/2016/08/12/a-massive-new-study-debunks-a-widespread-theory-for-donald-trumps-success/?utm_term=.4014a8c522bc

https://www.psychologytoday.com/blog/the-situation-lab/201607/who-supports-donald-trump

 

[bunnycat]

I think some of it is also ingrained "reflex" as it were. I live in a DEEPLY conservative state. The majority if my family is deeply conservative. My own father is conservative but did not like trump... however he has voted conservative all his life....and no matter how much I explained and how much he agreed with me...he couldn't bring himself to vote any other way. At best, he may have left the president spot blank...but party line everywhere else, even though I try to tell him that because of the things he believes he's really not actually a conservative....there are lots of people in this country just like that....

This is exactly why I started this thread/post. What you are articulating here is really important. This is what I was trying to explain, probably badly over on the other page about my mother, I would have loved to have seen how she voted in your election if she was a US citizen, because I asked her and she said and I quote "I'd never vote for Trump because I don't trust him, I think he is a slimeball" but I would then go on to say that her political views her political bias is entrenched, so that means she would have been forced to do three things, vote for the Republican party but not Trump himself specifically (or for other people where the vote still ultimately went to the Republican party), do what Dancing Fire and a few others claim they did and not vote at all, or change her political beliefs that she has held all of her life and voted for Hillary. I don't think option 3 would have been a viable option for her if she was placed in those circumstances, so therefore she and many Americans who don't like, trust or didn't want to vote for Trump himself are still left with options 1 and option 2.

Your father echoes the same sentiment I heard from Dancing Fire on here, they couldn't bring themselves to vote for Hillary for a number of complex reasons. One of my mother's close friends who shares many similar views is a duel US and Australian citizen and my mother said she openly admitted voting for Trump. This woman is a lovely lady probably nearly 80 who would do anything for anyone, so I think it's too simplistic when we label all of Trump's supporters as fitting a profile of being mainly racist white working class men, some of them are, some of them hold extreme points of view, but many of his voters (as opposed to his devout supporters) simply do not fit that profile.

Yeah- it's a tough cookie. My own friends and family surely run the complete gamut. I have family that is exactly as the stereotypical Trump supporter, down to the xenophobia/racism (outspoken and outright), evangelism, and poorly educated. (That's a big bunch of them. I am actually banished from them now for my "liberal" views...oh well...too bad so sad...and yes- I got told to go to my "safe space", in writing, so I don't take kindly to those terms but try to let it slide off me...) Then there's evangelical family that votes Conservative, but hold a lot of liberal social views, and Conservative moral views so they vote their morals, and their morals said no to trump but yes to conservatives. (They still speak to me....) And then there are friends who are both Christian and socially and morally liberal. And of course, let's not forget my adoring agnostic husband....who resides just left of center. Financially conservative, morally and socially liberal.... plus all my other acquaintances who lean left or far left...a real melting pot to navigate this past year....

I did finally explain the Hillary email thing to my dad and think I got through with the point that most of the emails that were classified weren't considered classified until after the investigation started. But then I also had to explain how the Electoral College worked and why Hillary got more votes but didn't win and I'm still not sure that one stuck...

 

[t-c]

This is exactly why I started this thread/post. What you are articulating here is really important. This is what I was trying to explain, probably badly over on the other page about my mother, I would have loved to have seen how she voted in your election if she was a US citizen, because I asked her and she said and I quote "I'd never vote for Trump because I don't trust him, I think he is a slimeball" but I would then go on to say that her political views her political bias is entrenched, so that means she would have been forced to do three things, vote for the Republican party but not Trump himself specifically (or for other people where the vote still ultimately went to the Republican party), do what Dancing Fire and a few others claim they did and not vote at all, or change her political beliefs that she has held all of her life and voted for Hillary. I don't think option 3 would have been a viable option for her if she was placed in those circumstances, so therefore she and many Americans who don't like, trust or didn't want to vote for Trump himself are still left with options 1 and option 2.

Your father echoes the same sentiment I heard from Dancing Fire on here, they couldn't bring themselves to vote for Hillary for a number of complex reasons. One of my mother's close friends who shares many similar views is a duel US and Australian citizen and my mother said she openly admitted voting for Trump. This woman is a lovely lady probably nearly 80 who would do anything for anyone, so I think it's too simplistic when we label all of Trump's supporters as fitting a profile of being mainly racist white working class men, some of them are, some of them hold extreme points of view, but many of his voters (as opposed to his devout supporters) simply do not fit that profile.

This is an excerpt from an opinion piece written by Kevin Baker on the NY Times that I wholeheartedly agree with: https://www.nytimes.com/2017/01/21/opinion/sunday/the-america-we-lost-when-trump-won.html

I have listened to all the blame foisted on the Clinton campaign for doing this or that wrong, or the media for not exposing Mr. Trump, or for giving him too much airtime. I don’t buy it. Hillary Clinton’s campaign wasn’t that bad, and Mr. Trump was exposed enough for any thinking adult to see exactly what he is.

From assorted commentators I have heard that it is unfair or condescending to say that all Trump voters were racists, or sexists, or that they hated foreigners. All right. But if they were not, they were willing to accept an awful lot of racism and sexism and xenophobia in the deal they made with their champion, and demanded precious few particulars in return.

 

[bunnycat]

arkie...have you seen any of these? I've briefly scanned them. Other than the Pew study, I couldn't find, using the same casual search delimiters as I did for trump info, anything that goes in-depth about Clinton supporters. That is likely due to the fact that she lost.

http://www.pewresearch.org/fact-tank/2016/10/20/6-charts-that-show-where-clinton-and-trump-supporters-differ/

This one claims authoritarianism is the single defining trait of trump supporters.
http://www.politico.com/magazine/story/2016/01/donald-trump-2016-authoritarian-213533

https://www.washingtonpost.com/news/wonk/wp/2016/08/12/a-massive-new-study-debunks-a-widespread-theory-for-donald-trumps-success/?utm_term=.4014a8c522bc

https://www.psychologytoday.com/blog/the-situation-lab/201607/who-supports-donald-trump

I have read similar things in the last months. One I read recently was from a reporter in Arizona (since Arizona has a pretty big border with MX, though not as big as TX border) and they interviewed people who voted for trump, and the consensus was of him doing a good job so far....I'm paraphrasing but some commentary went along the lines that they liked the seemingly "simple" solution to what they see as a "simple problem" (Mexico illegal immigration). Of course, it's actually a really complicated issue but, there are lots of people in this country (for Pete's sake, in my own family) that want and like things in black and white terms, and that is surely a draw towards trump. Everything is quite black and white. This is one area where I think Democrats do not do the best job...They need more ways to keep what they say true, but also keep it simple...

 

[AprilBaby]

There was no way I could vote for Hillary, too much junk in her closet. My conscience wouldn't let me vote for Trump. He did seem the better of two evils. However, I live in Illinois which always goes Democratic so even if I don't vote, 2 or 3 dead people vote for me.

 

[arkieb1]

arkie...have you seen any of these? I've briefly scanned them. Other than the Pew study, I couldn't find, using the same casual search delimiters as I did for trump info, anything that goes in-depth about Clinton supporters. That is likely due to the fact that she lost.

http://www.pewresearch.org/fact-tank/2016/10/20/6-charts-that-show-where-clinton-and-trump-supporters-differ/

This one claims authoritarianism is the single defining trait of trump supporters.
http://www.politico.com/magazine/story/2016/01/donald-trump-2016-authoritarian-213533

https://www.washingtonpost.com/news/wonk/wp/2016/08/12/a-massive-new-study-debunks-a-widespread-theory-for-donald-trumps-success/?utm_term=.4014a8c522bc

https://www.psychologytoday.com/blog/the-situation-lab/201607/who-supports-donald-trump

Your own material backs up exactly what I'm arguing here and many of the people on this forum who admit to either voting for Trump or not voting at all suggest too, they aren't all white working class (what you call blue collar) young men out of work. Sure lots of them are, your articles indicate that but it also clearly states many of them are white, they have secure jobs they have decent incomes. This is the specific part in your second article that I've heard reiterated on here from Dancing Fire and From Ruby as well;

"This may help explain one puzzle that has stumped election observers so far. Trump has found success playing up economic grievances, stoking anxieties about immigrants, and complaining about Chinese competition. How is it then, that so many of his supporters seem to be economically secure? It could be that Trump supporters aren't worried for themselves, but for their children."

And it seems to me as I've indicated in this discussion so far that many of Trump's voters have this perception (even if it's incorrect) that Trump or indeed anyone that offers something new would be a change to the current set of economic circumstances their children will find themselves in. I heard and read it time and time again from more moderate voters, "we don't like Trump but we can't do another 4 more years of what the Democrats will do to our economy".

The article you have linked with defining traits of Trump supporters and authoritarianism is fascinating. Again I keep reading time and time on here (there is a thread currently saying looking at those terrible out of control protestors hurling rocks and setting fire to things) a small number of conservatives arguing the right side of society is out of control because look at those people conducting themselves like this. I also see a reoccurring pattern about these fear they have, for example back when we were discussing Black Lives Matter T-shirts being worn in schools and people who I would term more moderate conservatives were what I would describe as openly fearful of their children going to school because of this. Now you and I Matata, laugh this off as some sort of racially driven paranoid hypersensitive over reaction to something we personally don't see as a threat at all and yet, to a number of people on here this perceived threat of possible riots, or of some danger to their children or children in their neighbourhoods seemed very real.