Say It Ain't So

[DWill]

Trump strikes me as a pragmatic businessman more than having any real solid principles. He's as likely to renege on his own constituency as anyone else based on pragmatic considerations.

Hi Flann. It's sad if the best we can hope for is that we elected a blowhard, that is, someone who was just spouting nonsense because he thought it had an appeal but who wasn't serious about any of it. If he was ever sincere, then in his first few hours of office he should appoint a special prosecutor to investigate Clinton and rescind the executive orders that shielded millions from deportation. If he doesn't carry out those or other actions, then surely he is the most cynical of politicians despite his claim not to be one. I'll take an "elite" over such a guy.

[Flann 5]

I'm just amazed at how many people are buying into this idea that "elites" have captured the reins of government and have failed to recognize the plight of the average citizen. That charge has become all the rage. It's at best a fuzzy-minded way to look at our problems and how to address them. Are we soon going to notice a great empathy for the common man as a new set of politicians moves in to set up shop? How naive it would be to think so.

What we've probably said goodbye to during Trump's rise is the remains of a civic culture, in which certain behavior is regarded as the norm and certain other behavior is ostracized. Or am I just parroting the elites who have said the same thing?

Hi Dwill. I know you are closer to the political realities in the U.S. than I am. It does appear though that States from what's called the rust belt for example switched from a former traditional allegiance to the Democrats to Trump.
Trump seems to have identified these people as grieviously neglected by the government and tapped into other fears such as radical Islamists infiltrating the U.S. along with genuinely displaced war refugees.
He also made ethnic groups like the Mexicans who illegally entered the U.S. to be the supplanters of U.S. born nationals and acccording to him taking their jobs.
So he displayed the worst elements of demagoguery in his rhetoric in appealing to a mixture of facts,generalizations and genuine fears.

Whether it's possible to provide employment in these areas of post industrial wastelands and blue collar unemployment is a good question.
Probably some kind of public infrastructure projects along with educational opportunities such as evening classes in areas of expertise where there are jobs available would not be a bad idea.
The same thing happened in England where the Brexit referendum showed a clear divide between places like London and northern cities of dying or dead industries which voted diametrically differently.
The people of these northern wastelands felt they were left high and dry by the faceless European rulers in Brussels and their own government. And the Syrian refugee crisis has added to the same kinds of fears and confusion among European governments about jobs being taken or Islamic extremism.

So everything is swinging to extremes of Right and Left and that is a cause for concern.

In the U.S. Trump seems to have outflanked the leadership of the party he's supposed to represent and has recognized that rhetoric which is extreme does get results.
Whatever the reason is for their neglect the Democrats do need to learn that you can't just ignore real problems that ordinary people have.
The U.S. is divided in many ways and the secular/religious is another.
People like Dan Barker are as much a part of the polarizing problem as right wing shock jocks fulminating at the secularists. Barker's Freedom from religion foundation operates as self appointed police and enforcers of a very narrow view of constitutional separation of State and religion,harassing and slapping lawsuits on ordinary people perceived to transgress his determination of what the law allows.
This is zealotry beyond reason.
So, I'm not impressed with Trump's tactics but hope that he does take a more considered view of what it actually involves to be President of the U.S.and actually does address the problems of the unemployed,immigration etc in an effective and fair way.

[DWill]

Trump voters will not like what happens next

By Garrison Keillor November 9 at 8:39 AM
Garrison Keillor is an author and radio personality.

So he won. The nation takes a deep breath. Raw ego and proud illiteracy have won out, and a severely learning-disabled man with a real character problem will be president. We are so exhausted from thinking about this election, millions of people will take up leaf-raking and garage cleaning with intense pleasure. We liberal elitists are wrecks. The Trumpers had a whale of a good time, waving their signs, jeering at the media, beating up protesters, chanting “Lock her up” — we elitists just stood and clapped. Nobody chanted “Stronger Together.” It just doesn’t chant.

The Trumpers never expected their guy to actually win the thing, and that’s their problem now. They wanted only to whoop and yell, boo at the H-word, wear profane T-shirts, maybe grab a crotch or two, jump in the RV with a couple of six-packs and go out and shoot some spotted owls. It was pleasure enough for them just to know that they were driving us wild with dismay — by “us,” I mean librarians, children’s authors, yoga practitioners, Unitarians, bird-watchers, people who make their own pasta, opera-goers, the grammar police, people who keep books on their shelves, that bunch. The Trumpers exulted in knowing we were tearing our hair out. They had our number, like a bratty kid who knows exactly how to make you grit your teeth and froth at the mouth.

Alas for the Trump voters, the disasters he will bring on this country will fall more heavily on them than anyone else. The uneducated white males who elected him are the vulnerable ones, and they will not like what happens next.

To all the patronizing B.S. we’ve read about Trump expressing the white working-class’s displacement and loss of the American Dream, I say, “Feh!” — go put your head under cold water. Resentment is no excuse for bald-faced stupidity. America is still the land where the waitress’s kids can grow up to become physicists and novelists and pediatricians, but it helps a lot if the waitress and her husband encourage good habits and the ambition to use your God-given talents and the kids aren’t plugged into electronics day and night. Whooping it up for the candidate of cruelty and ignorance does less than nothing for your kids.

We liberal elitists are now completely in the clear. The government is in Republican hands. Let them deal with him. Democrats can spend four years raising heirloom tomatoes, meditating, reading Jane Austen, traveling around the country, tasting artisan beers, and let the Republicans build the wall and carry on the trade war with China and deport the undocumented and deal with opioids, and we Democrats can go for a long , brisk walk and smell the roses.

I like Republicans. I used to spend Sunday afternoons with a bunch of them, drinking Scotch and soda and trying to care about NFL football. It was fun. I tried to think like them. (Life is what you make it. People are people. When the going gets tough, tough noogies.) But I came back to liberal elitism.

Don’t be cruel. Elvis said it, and it’s true. We all experienced cruelty back in our playground days — boys who beat up on the timid, girls who made fun of the homely and naive — and most of us, to our shame, went along with it, afraid to defend the victims lest we become one of them. But by your 20s, you should be done with cruelty. Mr. Trump was the cruelest candidate since George Wallace. How he won on fear and bile is for political pathologists to study. The country is already tired of his noise, even his own voters. He is likely to become the most intensely disliked president since Herbert Hoover. His children will carry the burden of his name. He will never be happy in his own skin. But the damage he will do to our country — who knows? His supporters voted for change, and boy, are they going to get it.

Back to real life. I went up to my home town the other day and ran into my gym teacher, Stan Nelson, looking good at 96. He commanded a landing craft at Normandy on June 6, 1944, and never said a word about it back then, just made us do chin-ups whether we wanted to or not. I saw my biology teacher Lyle Bradley, a Marine pilot in the Korean War, still going bird-watching in his 90s. I was not a good student then, but I am studying both of them now. They have seen it all and are still optimistic. The past year of politics has taught us absolutely nothing. Zilch. Zero. Nada. The future is scary. Let the uneducated have their day. I am now going to pay more attention to teachers.

[johnson1010]

I'm not suggesting we revoke Trump's win.
He did win under current rules.

I think the electoral college should be addressed, however. Winning the popular vote and then losing by 62 points is ridiculous.

[geo]

I'm not suggesting we revoke Trump's win.
He did win under current rules.

I think the electoral college should be addressed, however. Winning the popular vote and then losing by 62 points is ridiculous.

It looks that way. Apparently, each state is free to move to a proportional system of electoral votes. Nebraska and Maine are the only states to do so. But I believe if more states did, the winner of the popular vote would always win the election. It does seem that the electoral college is no longer relevant.

[johnson1010]

it comes down to this:

Is it our intent that we are a single country of people who collectively vote for a president to run the executive branch?
Or is it the intent that each state is holding an election and then it is the vote of state vs state that decides who is head of the executive.

Is there really any need to pretend we are not a single unified country at this point? That states might break away? Not any more likely than a county breaking away from a state.

Is this a country for the people by the people, or a country for the state by the state?

Clearly this is no longer relevant.

[Robert Tulip]

Clinton let the cat out of the bag with her undisciplined threat to the “basket of deplorables”. It showed that she and her supporters really hold the bigoted view that all conservatives are deplorable and deserve to be ignored by the sanctimonious elites.

Her "basket of deplorables" remark (it was not a threat) was a mistake equivalent to Romney's "47 percent" in 2012. Set that one statement alongside Trump's catalog of egregious outrages; there's no possible comparison.

You are forgetting, DWill, that all political language is code and symbol. Of course Clinton herself was not crass enough to issue threats, but her supporters helpfully explained that the basket cases of the lunar right were in their sights straight after Hillary had selected the drapes on Pennsylvania Avenue. It was not voiced as a threat but was perceived as one.

In Deploraville, life is harsh and competitive. People want to see that those who win do so on individual merit, rather than through unfair support from government, within the framework of supporting Team America against foreigners. Hillary’s remark collides against that value system and its theory of justice, and instead promotes political correctness and big government.

By contrast, Romney’s 47% comment was all about the Republican complaint about welfare deadbeats, about people who don’t earn their way in the world, who don’t help make America competitive and prosperous, but still get an equal vote with the wealth creators.

You can’t just equate Clinton and Romney’s comments as political gaffes, even though both were about targeting the biggest possible social group who the incoming government would antagonise as inferior. They both exposed a deep level of honesty. But the difference is that the deplorables have a strong heritage going back to the pioneers and American values of liberty and dignity, while the 47% are a new deal, spongers who manipulate government to bludge off taxpayers.

I'm just amazed at how many people are buying into this idea that "elites" have captured the reins of government and have failed to recognize the plight of the average citizen. That charge has become all the rage. It's at best a fuzzy-minded way to look at our problems and how to address them. Are we soon going to notice a great empathy for the common man as a new set of politicians moves in to set up shop? How naive it would be to think so.

I see only 93% of the DC swampies share your amazement. My sense is that affirmative action is the primary symbol of elite thinking, imagining that inequality can be overcome by government active discrimination. The primary example is migration, where elites set aside the rule of law and instead support misguided theories of compassion.

What we've probably said goodbye to during Trump's rise is the remains of a civic culture, in which certain behavior is regarded as the norm and certain other behavior is ostracized. Or am I just parroting the elites who have said the same thing?

Trump may have behaved like a gorilla during the campaign, in order to show he is a tough guy who people can’t mess with, but his victory speech was gracious and civil, showing that he is looking for a long term transformation of American values.

[Robert Tulip]

From Leonard Cohen the master

Democracy

/C F /C /C G /C
It's coming through a hole in the air, from those nights in Tiananmen Square.
/F /Bb F
It's coming from the feel that this ain't exactly real,
/C G /C /E Am E
or it's real, but it ain't exactly there. From the wars against disorder,
/Am E7 Am /E Am E
from the sirens night and day, from the fires of the homeless,
/Am E7 Am /G /F /C Fm
from the ashes of the gay: Democracy is coming to the U. S. A.

It's coming through a crack in the wall; on a visionary flood of alcohol;
from the staggering account of the Sermon on the Mount
which I don't pretend to understand at all. It's coming from the silence
on the dock of the bay, from the brave, the bold, the battered
heart of Chevrolet: Democracy is coming to the U.S.A.

It's coming from the sorrow in the street, the holy places where the races meet;
from the homicidal bitchin' that goes down in every kitchen
to determine who will serve and who will eat. From the wells of disappointment
where the women kneel to pray for the grace of God in the desert here
and the desert far away: Democracy is coming to the U.S.A.

C /G /F /C /C
Sail on, sail on O mighty Ship of State!
/G /F
To the Shores of Need Past the Reefs of Greed
/C /C /Dm /G /F /C /C
Through the Squalls of Hate Sail on, sail on, sail on, sail on.

It's coming to America first, the cradle of the best and of the worst.
It's here they got the range and the machinery for change
and it's here they got the spiritual thirst. It's here the family's broken
and it's here the lonely say that the heart has got to open
in a fundamental way: Democracy is coming to the U.S.A.

It's coming from the women and the men. O baby, we'll be making love again.
We'll be going down so deep the river's going to weep,
and the mountain's going to shout Amen! It's coming like the tidal flood
beneath the lunar sway, imperial, mysterious,
in amorous array: Democracy is coming to the U.S.A.

Sail on, sail on O mighty Ship of State!
To the Shores of Need Past the Reefs of Greed
Through the Squalls of Hate Sail on, sail on, sail on, sail on.

I'm sentimental, if you know what I mean I love the country but I can't stand the scene.
And I'm neither left or right I'm just staying home tonight,
getting lost in that hopeless little screen. But I'm stubborn as those garbage bags
that Time cannot decay, I'm junk but I'm still holding up
this little wild bouquet: Democracy is coming to the U.S.A.

Sail on, sail on O mighty Ship of State!
To the Shores of Need Past the Reefs of Greed
Through the Squalls of Hate Sail on, sail on, sail on, sail on.

[Harry Marks]

Her "basket of deplorables" remark (it was not a threat) was a mistake equivalent to Romney's "47 percent" in 2012. Set that one statement alongside Trump's catalog of egregious outrages; there's no possible comparison.

Right, but as a signifier of class, it is in the same category as Romney's but opposite to Trump's.

I'm just amazed at how many people are buying into this idea that "elites" have captured the reins of government and have failed to recognize the plight of the average citizen. That charge has become all the rage. It's at best a fuzzy-minded way to look at our problems and how to address them. Are we soon going to notice a great empathy for the common man as a new set of politicians moves in to set up shop? How naive it would be to think so.

The economic devastation of the Midwestern states who turned (barely) red is very real. And it really was generated by trade, and Bill Clinton really did back free(r) trade. Why is California so solidly Democrat? See if it still would be if Democrats tried to roll back world trade rules to 1995.

Recession increases insecurity and divisiveness. Long, deep recessions create desperation. If the managerial class cannot maintain prosperity, democracy will take revenge, as it did in 2008. That's the only mechanism we have for accountability.

What we've probably said goodbye to during Trump's rise is the remains of a civic culture, in which certain behavior is regarded as the norm and certain other behavior is ostracized. Or am I just parroting the elites who have said the same thing?

Civic culture like holding hearings on Supreme Court nominees? We were already in big trouble based on an inability to grant respect to people who profoundly disagree with us.

Norms will continue to evolve, and racism and sexism will continue to be less and less acceptable. We are a long way from 1965 and we have elected Barack Obama.

It's pretty amazing that so many evangelicals were willing to hold their nose and vote for a piece of outrageousness like Trump, but I don't think there is any other way to read it than to see it as a class issue. They are more offended by forcing everyone to serve gay weddings if asked than by the kinds of coarseness which liberal orthodoxy has already made commonplace on the web. Anthony Weiner ring any bells?

[Harry Marks]

Trump strikes me as a pragmatic businessman more than having any real solid principles. He's as likely to renege on his own constituency as anyone else based on pragmatic considerations.

Hi Flann. It's sad if the best we can hope for is that we elected a blowhard, that is, someone who was just spouting nonsense because he thought it had an appeal but who wasn't serious about any of it.

It may be that Trump has stumbled on a new solution to the "Republican problem" of needing to appease the rabid right in order to get nominated, while needing to pivot to the center to get elected.

The Tea Party was already telling us that the issue is not "right vs. left," e.g. business vs. government. Now what we have seen in all its glory is that one can avoid being "primaried" by giving signals of full-throated allegiance to "traditional America" (not empty rhetoric, but not delicately avoiding the sound of tribalism either) while leaving open the possibility of pragmatic rewards to constituents. I think we will see more of that from Presidential candidates on the right, probably with much more finesse than the Donald could manage.

If he was ever sincere, then in his first few hours of office he should appoint a special prosecutor to investigate Clinton and rescind the executive orders that shielded millions from deportation. If he doesn't carry out those or other actions, then surely he is the most cynical of politicians despite his claim not to be one. I'll take an "elite" over such a guy.

He is plenty cynical, as the next few years will make clear. But he may not be able to justify a special prosecutor. He surely will rescind the deportation orders. It also looks like he is going to trash the climate and send the health insurance industry into a giddy tizzy of price increases with all deliberate speed. It is cold comfort for Democrats that by the time the chickens come home to roost it will be too late to fix things.