• We need to know your opinion about our social media accounts! Tell us here if you follow us on social media and what we could improve.

Will Trump Ultimately Be A Good Thing?

They're not morons. That's not why Trump has his appeal (though his "I love the poorly educated" comment was yuge in establishing his appeal). I was just about to add to my post and your reply, Farm Boy, gives me a good pretext for doing so.

One massive element of Trump's appeal, and he played it up constantly in the 2016 campaign, is that he's "not a politician." He ran not against Hillary but against Washington. In his "American carnage" inauguration speech, he calls out Republicans every bit as aggressively as Democrats.

Unless another celebrity parachutes in, all the Rs will be able to give their voters in upcoming cycles will be more of those "politicians" that Trump has taught his fanboyz to hate. They will actively withhold their vote from the R party for only giving them such.
Right, Trump's supporters aren't being "tricked" into supporting him. They might be getting misled on a bunch of things, conspiracy theories, election lies etc., but generally, their basic support for Trump isn't based on them being fooled, or "stupid" or similar. For me the general sentiment goes back to when McCain snatched the mic out of that elderly woman's hand at the Town Hall during the 2008 campaign. She was accusing Obama of being "an Arab" or similar and McCain effectively "shushed" her on live TV.

The Republican party had been doing that to their most loyal base of support for years, whereas Trump doesn't do that. Trump does the opposite. Trump empowers the base and gives voice to things that they felt they had been "shushed" on and ignored about for years, decades even. And its not just prejudice, bigotry etc., there are plenty of economic and social issues where Trump aired things out. On so many issues for the base, he made them feel like they were free to air it out without being told that it was taboo or they could not talk about it, or that it was not important.

Thinking about it... I'm not convinced that Trump's departure from the political stage would reverse the trend of his movement though. Sure people might not be satisfied with some other politician trying to take up his mantle as a POTUS candidate, but on the Congressional level, candidates are getting voted into office on the Trump program, without actually being Trump. There's also the possibility that some other candidate will emerge, who we aren't yet familiar with, to pick up where Trump left off. It's essentially impossible for anyone to pick up Trump's mantle right now, because Trump is still wearing it. However, Trump leaving the stage will create a vacuum, that will be filled, by something/someone, even if it's currently unclear who it would be or how that might look.
 
Last edited:
One of the great delights I have in prospect is watching alongside the good analytical minds on this site how it does in fact play out.

It's essentially impossible for anyone to pick up Trump's mantle right now

cape. (Just to stick with the Elvis theme.) ;)

Now, just to delve a little bit deeper into your analysis:

The Republican party had been doing that to their most loyal base of support for years,

But even more the left, since "political correctness" is essentially a set of speech taboos. When Trump released this, he released a whole lot of pent-up energy. Guy's a genius at "reading the room."

Thinking about it... I'm not convinced that Trump's departure from the political stage would reverse the trend of his movement though. Sure people might not be satisfied with some other politician trying to take up his mantle as a POTUS candidate, but on the Congressional level, candidates are getting voted into office on the Trump program, without actually being Trump.

You're not wrong, but I think it will be less effectively focused under anybody else but Trump. With his WWF background, he knows how to craft it all as a grand narrative about how he is heroically battling evil antagonists like DeepState and FakeNews and SatanicPedophiles. Among his other (cough unduplicatable cough) skills are skills as a fabulist and as a showman.

Is anybody else going to inspire those crazy Ben Garrison cartoons, in other words?
 
Last edited:
But even more the left, since "political correctness" is essentially a set of speech taboos. When Trump released this, he released a whole lot of pent-up energy. Guy's a genius at "reading the room."
Yeah, Trump capitalized on the reactionary energy that's been growing & growing for the past couple of decades. That's his jam. He absolutely couldn't have done it without the Democrats. You could argue the liberal media got Trump into office.

 
But even more the left, since "political correctness" is essentially a set of speech taboos. When Trump released this, he released a whole lot of pent-up energy. Guy's a genius at "reading the room."

You're not wrong, but I think it will be less effectively focused under anybody else but Trump. With his WWF background, he knows how to craft it all as a grand narrative about how he is heroically battling evil antagonists like DeepState and FakeNews and SatanicPedophiles. Among his other (cough unduplicatable cough) skills are skills as a fabulist and as a showman.

Is anybody else going to inspire those crazy Ben Garrison cartoons, in other words?
Something that struck me as particularly shrewd on Trump's part, was his dismissal on the notion of "woke" or "wokeness" or being at war with woke ideology. Trump essentially hand waived it as meaningless and unimportant, ostensibly because it was "poorly defined" or similar. But as you point out, Trump had already gone to battle against "political correctness", which is certainly one of the things that the current pejorative use of "woke" has evolved to encompass, particularly in DeSantis' use of the term as his personal slogan/bogeyman/strawman.

It seems to me that Trump, understanding branding so well, may be rejecting "woke" as a target, because he recognizes that "anti-woke" is DeSantis' thing and he does not want to give any air or legitimacy to it. By dismissing it as meaningless, he is essentially mocking DeSantis whole raison d'etre. He's effectively calling DeSantis' main cause stupid/silly, and by extension, calling DeSantis himself stupid, silly and pointless. Trump has his own catchphrases/slogans, like "Fake News" etc., and he is denying DeSantis the opportunity to create any good ones.
 
Right, Trump's supporters aren't being "tricked" into supporting him. They might be getting misled on a bunch of things, conspiracy theories, election lies etc., but generally, their basic support for Trump isn't based on them being fooled, or "stupid" or similar. For me the general sentiment goes back to when McCain snatched the mic out of that elderly woman's hand at the Town Hall during the 2008 campaign. She was accusing Obama of being "an Arab" or similar and McCain effectively "shushed" her on live TV.

The Republican party had been doing that to their most loyal base of support for years, whereas Trump doesn't do that. Trump does the opposite. Trump empowers the base and gives voice to things that they felt they had been "shushed" on and ignored about for years, decades even. And its not just prejudice, bigotry etc., there are plenty of economic and social issues where Trump aired things out. On so many issues for the base, he made them feel like they were free to air it out without being told that it was taboo or they could not talk about it, or that it was not important.
Well put. Trump appeals to those who've been made to feel like naughty children. And the more him & his elk are condemned the more they get to feel like underdogs, oppressed, whathaveyou. And of course everyone likes to bully a bully (that's like 90% of all story, a bully getting his) but rolling w the naughty child analogy, he gets off on any attention, especially negative as it's the most charged. And like in the WWF analogy when there's enough emotional charge the need for a coherent storyline becomes less & less.
 
Something that struck me as particularly shrewd on Trump's part, was his dismissal on the notion of "woke" or "wokeness" or being at war with woke ideology. Trump essentially hand waived it as meaningless and unimportant, ostensibly because it was "poorly defined" or similar. But as you point out, Trump had already gone to battle against "political correctness", which is certainly one of the things that the current pejorative use of "woke" has evolved to encompass, particularly in DeSantis' use of the term as his personal slogan/bogeyman/strawman.

It seems to me that Trump, understanding branding so well, may be rejecting "woke" as a target, because he recognizes that "anti-woke" is DeSantis' thing and he does not want to give any air or legitimacy to it. By dismissing it as meaningless, he is essentially mocking DeSantis whole raison d'etre. He's effectively calling DeSantis' main cause stupid/silly, and by extension, calling DeSantis himself stupid, silly and pointless. Trump has his own catchphrases/slogans, like "Fake News" etc., and he is denying DeSantis the opportunity to create any good ones.
He realizes the anti-woke is getting played out. Like the popular girl in school ripping on imitators rocking what she wore last month.
 
It seems to me that Trump, understanding branding so well, may be rejecting "woke" as a target, because he recognizes that "anti-woke" is DeSantis' thing and he does not want to give any air or legitimacy to it. By dismissing it as meaningless, he is essentially mocking DeSantis whole raison d'etre. He's effectively calling DeSantis' main cause stupid/silly, and by extension, calling DeSantis himself stupid, silly and pointless. Trump has his own catchphrases/slogans, like "Fake News" etc., and he is denying DeSantis the opportunity to create any good ones.

I think this is correct in terms of effects, but in terms of what's going on here, Trump does not make calculations like this. He's not thinking in his head "oh this is how I can mess up DeSantis' Thing", because he doesn't think like that. That's the real difference betwen him and DeSantis (and I stole the terminology from Chapo Trap House): Trump is a poster and DeSantis is a reply guy.
 
Trump's economic messaging appeal, his class messaging appeal, that's a winner issue despite the unpopular social issues of the party. The realignment is real and ongoing. "Poorly educated." There's a lot in that, you're right. Disdain, disadvantage, dismissal, the implied assumption of dumbness given voice - they know he's a politician. But he does not talk the same way. The president is first and foremost a cheerleader. My wife's grandfather, god bless him, I don't even remember what the conversation was about, and this was ages before Trump: there was some comment about the coasts in politics, education rates, income... it all mushes together in my brain. But in reference to the Midwest or the Rust Belt, whichever it was(I think it was the "Rust Belt" as a term), he said basically "Yeah, but we build all their cars and grow all their food, they can screw off." He was a clever man, smart and wise(California hadn't subsidized the oversized transformers to everloving hell, yet). But he was religious and was a lineman his whole life. Not the right sort of person for a politicians politician - and they know we know that.

It's going to get more and more clear the more high education high income suburban Republicans realize their home is with their Democrat people moving forward. They love vanity projects, it's practically all they do.
 
Trump's economic messaging appeal, his class messaging appeal, that's a winner issue despite the unpopular social issues of the party.

Can you summarize his economic and class messaging appeal in a few sentences?
 
Trump is a poster and DeSantis is a reply guy.
This is exactly correct and (to turn it to my thesis) Trump is a poster who turns everyone else into a reply guy.
--the Poster
 
Trump's economic messaging appeal, his class messaging appeal, that's a winner issue despite the unpopular social issues of the party. The realignment is real and ongoing. "Poorly educated." There's a lot in that, you're right. Disdain, disadvantage, dismissal, the implied assumption of dumbness given voice - they know he's a politician. But he does not talk the same way. The president is first and foremost a cheerleader. My wife's grandfather, god bless him, I don't even remember what the conversation was about, and this was ages before Trump: there was some comment about the coasts in politics, education rates, income... it all mushes together in my brain. But in reference to the Midwest or the Rust Belt, whichever it was(I think it was the "Rust Belt" as a term), he said basically "Yeah, but we build all their cars and grow all their food, they can screw off." He was a clever man, smart and wise(California hadn't subsidized the oversized transformers to everloving hell, yet). But he was religious and was a lineman his whole life. Not the right sort of person for a politicians politician - and they know we know that.

It's going to get more and more clear the more high education high income suburban Republicans realize their home is with their Democrat people moving forward. They love vanity projects, it's practically all they do.
My Dad grew up in Ohio. No college, went straight into the Army out of High School during Vietnam, then became a contractor/drywaller/handyman. Never bought/owned any kind of car but American brands his entire life. He had this saying "99 degrees on the wall, but can't tie their shoes". It was generally his catchphrase for mocking educated professionals who he saw as looking down at guys like him... people with fancy degrees, but who could not do things he regarded as simple/essential, like fix a toilet, change a tire, perform basic repairs/maintenance on a car, etc.

Part of Trump's appeal is that he speaks plainly, like a regular guy. He gets mocked all the time for incoherent rambling, but the reality is, that's how people actually talk in ordinary day-to-day conversation. We ramble, we use slang, euphemisms, anecdotes, common sayings... we don't speak in carefully scripted, curated soundbites. We use fillers like "c'mon", "ya know", "like", "know what I mean", and similar. You can have a whole conversation with a person where over half of what they say is just "like" and "ya know", but you still follow what they are trying to get across to you. You understand what they are saying, even though its kind of gibberish and would look like nonsense if they were to transcribe it into a written form. Speaking plainly helps Trump connect with people, because they are less likely to feel like they are being talked down to or condescended. They can get a sense that he is is talking with them and to them rather than at them or over their heads. He's not trying to impress them with his soaring oratorical skills or hefty vocabulary.

On a related note, Biden does this too sometimes, particularly when he goes off script. That is part of Biden's appeal, that he relates to regular people, more so than many other politicians do.
 
Last edited:
Part of Trump's appeal is that he speaks plainly, like a regular guy. He gets mocked all the time for incoherent rambling, but the reality is, that's how people actually talk in ordinary day-to-day conversation. We ramble, we use slang, euphemisms, anecdotes, common sayings... we don't speak in carefully scripted, curated soundbites. We use fillers like "c'mon", "ya know", "like", "know what I mean", and similar. You can have a whole conversation with a person where over half of what they say is just "like" and "ya know", but you still follow what they are trying to get across to you. You understand what they are saying, even though its kind of gibberish and would look like nonsense if they were to transcribe it into a written form. Speaking plainly helps Trump connect with people, because they are less likely to feel like they are being talked down to or condescended. They can get a sense that he is is talking with them and to them rather than at them or over their heads. He's not trying to impress them with his soaring oratorical skills or hefty vocabulary.
Yeah, this was/is part of his appeal--bigly! And it's why his followers take what he says as true, even though he's the biggest liar on record: unscripted = true.

(Though we 99 degrees people did get him to stop saying "bigly" itself, for some reason.)
 
Yeah, this was/is part of his appeal--bigly! And it's why his followers take what he says as true, even though he's the biggest liar on record: unscripted = true.

(Though we 99 degrees people did get him to stop saying "bigly" itself, for some reason.)
Stephen Colbert (IIRC) coined the term "truthy", generally meaning something that isn't necessarily true, but seems/sounds like it should be true based on gut instinct, confirmation bias and similar, regardless of logic, facts, and evidence to the contrary.

Trump is an absolute master at using truthiness to his advantage.

I like to think we (the anti-Trump public and/or media) collectively mocked Trump out of using the word "bigly" because he was irritated about always being made fun of about it.
 
Can you summarize his economic and class messaging appeal in a few sentences?
"I love soup."
"Good soup."

Sorry, it's been 5 years, needed to actually look that one up.
 
Last edited:
Can you summarize his economic and class messaging appeal in a few sentences?
He didn’t have the standoffish, aristocratic air of Mitt Romney. He ate KFC. He talked about mining and manufacturing.

I think those elements and his “Washington outsider,” contrast to his first big rival ¡Jeb! gave him that extra push.
 
Stephen Colbert (IIRC) coined the term "truthy", generally meaning something that isn't necessarily true, but seems/sounds like it should be true based on gut instinct, confirmation bias and similar, regardless of logic, facts, and evidence to the contrary.
The corruption of programing concepts knows no bounds!

(I sincerely doubt anyone involved was considering programming concepts, much less corrupting them)
 
He didn’t have the standoffish, aristocratic air of Mitt Romney. He ate KFC. He talked about mining and manufacturing.

This is part of a recurring pattern where I ask conservatives about Trump's economic appeal and they respond using nothing but cultural signifiers.

I think those elements and his “Washington outsider,” contrast to his first big rival ¡Jeb! gave him that extra push.

Not to dispute the larger point but by "big rival" I assume you mean the first small animal Trump crushed under his wheels?
 
The president is first and foremost a cheerleader. I'm not even slightly kidding.

The man shows up and compliments Campbell's Soup(in Ohio, no less, I think). One of the more affordable ways to work in some storable vegetables into a food desert diet. And like Gori said, the man can read a room. After the report of the quote, the NPR newsman just couldn't help himself to criticize the salt content of the food. Yeah, we know. He knows how to demonstrate other people's disdain, perhaps because he's so full of it himself, but - yeah. He picks a tradewar with the Midwest's biggest grain customers, crushing the market, and he breaks the Republican playbook and puts us on the FDR dole. Not an FDR-style dole, but literally FDR's program. You ever wanted to get farmers on the same political side of an argument regarding free trade/protectionism with labor? It's... something man, it's something. "Racism probably?" :lol:
 
Last edited:
Top Bottom