DCZards wrote:dckingsfan wrote:DCZards wrote:
I hope that one of the goals of the protests is to say that the election of a bully and bigot who insults women and minorities to the nation's highest office reflects poorly on this country's values and principles--and we're willing to take to the streets to express our disgust.
Instead of taking to the streets they should have taken to the polling places.
Who says that these protesters didn't vote...and weren't among the majority of Americans who voted for Hillary over Trump?
No one is more anti-Trump than I am. The guy's a colossal creep. That said, I have a few comments on the recent posts here:
1. The majority of Americans didn't vote for Hilary. She got 48%; Trump got 47%; Johnson (the Libertarian) got 4%; the Green Party got less than 1%.
2. Nothing wrong with protest. But ask yourself this: had Hilary won, how would protests by Trump supporters look to you?
3. After a protest, people feel satisfied; they got it off their chests. Then the question is: do they organize? The next protest isn't as satisfying. What characterized my era wasn't protest -- though there was plenty of that -- it was organized pressure for change that was exerted on and within the institutional structure and legal structure of this country.
4. The position Trump is in will push him to the center. E.g. 30 million people are on Obamacare; we're already hearing him say that he wants to fix it not end it. It'll be the same on all the issues. Do you really think the people who run big corporations want trade barriers? Do you really think that if they don't want it it's going to happen anyway?
5. The outlier wins Presidential elections; that's what I've learned from all this. In '08 the Democratic power structure didn't want Obama -- "he's young, he's black, he's going to lose." Ditto the Republican power structure re: Trump this time. But, the parties no longer nominate their candidates; the people do. And someone with a blank political slate, someone who isn't identified w/ what people see as "the failures of the past" wins.
6. Donald Trump is *not* going to like being President. Or, if he does, it'll change him as a human being. It seems a little late for that, so I say he isn't going to like it. It's hard work, it's isolating, it's intolerant of impulsiveness, etc.
7. Donald Trump is going to do nothing significant whatsoever in re: the American economy that will help it grow, and above all nothing that will help the resentful white working class. There isn't anything he or any President can do to affect any of that.
Under ordinary circumstances, advanced economies grow at @2% a year over the long haul. You want 8% growth sustained over e.g. a decade or more like we had 50 years ago? First have a World War that badly damages those advanced economies, knocks them way down, kills major parts of their productive capacities, destroys their currencies, stuff like that -- all while maintaining your own productive capacity, currency, etc.
Anybody here looking for that? Anybody having trouble seeing the cost of that?
Economies grow, and wages rise, under the influence of increased productivity. Now, because productivity is measured in dollars it's not an altogether independent variable; things are a little (a lot) more complicated than that. But w/o increased productivity wages don't rise to speak of. Trade barriers won't help increase productivity.
Of course you can also create an entirely new industry -- viz. the PC industry 30 years ago and other technology industries since then. You think a President gets that done?
Despite the above, yes, it's going to be a bumpy ride. Seems kind of obvious -- at least based on rhetoric -- that we'll lose power as a nation, lose power globally. Who knows? Maybe that's a good idea. Or maybe Trump's bad instincts will be reined in by those around him.
Seems kind of obvious we won't have the kinds of Supreme Court justices that I like. But, there too we'll have to see. Trump is no kind of conservative I've ever seen -- no kind of conservative at all as far as I can tell. To be a conservative is to have a worked out set of policies, which he clearly doesn't. And I just can't see him relying on the advice of a pipsqueak like Newt Gingrich. It's interesting that he seems to be getting along w/ Obama. Given the seemingly inconsequential role that policy or structured ideology play in his mind, he may turn to him for advice.
Ok, that would be weird! But, hey, "weird" is the new normal, right?
