I'm usually not much for opinion pieces but I think this is close to hitting the nail on the head about some of the support Trump receives, particularly considering the demographics of his support. Trump Reflects White Male Fragility http://www.nytimes.com/2016/08/04/opinion/trump-reflects-white-male-fragility.html Reports of Donald Trump’s demise are an exaggeration, to paraphrase and repurpose Mark Twain. Yes, he can’t stop shooting off his mouth and shooting himself in the foot, and there are reports that his messy campaign is nearing the point of mutiny. Yes, he knows nearly nothing about world affairs and that becomes ever more apparent every time he stumbles through an interview. Sir, Putin invaded Ukraine in 2014, the same year you filmed your last installment of your reality game show “The Celebrity Apprentice.” Yes, his continued feud with the family of a fallen Muslim soldier may be the most ill advised and foolhardy folly in recent political memory (Trump keeps racking these up.) This is the same man who received five draft deferments during the Vietnam War, one for “bone spurs in his heels” according to The New York Times. While throngs of his contemporaries were fighting — and dying – in battle, Trump was being featured on the front page of The Times after he and his father were sued by the Department of Justice for anti-black bias in their rental properties. Three years later, The Times profiled him with a backhanded compliment of the nouveau riche: “He rides around town in a chauffeured silver Cadillac with his initials, DJT, on the plates. He dates slinky fashion models, belongs to the most elegant clubs and, at only 30 years of age, estimates that he is worth ‘more than $200 million.’” Yes, he doesn’t seem to know the difference between Tim Kaine, the Democratic Virginia senator whom Hillary Clinton tapped as her running mate, and Tom Kean, the Republican former governor of New Jersey who last held that office 26 years ago, the same year Trump boasted in his book “Surviving at the Top,” “I’ve never had any trouble in bed,” and counseled in Vanity Fair, “When a man leaves a woman, especially when it was perceived that he has left for a piece of ass — a good one! — there are 50 percent of the population who will love the woman who was left.” Yes, yes, yes. But Donald Trump is bigger than all of this, or shall I say, smaller. He appeals to something deeper, something baser: Fear. His whole campaign slogan, “Make America Great Again,” is in fact an inverted admission of loss — lost primacy, lost privilege, lost prestige. And who feels that they have lost the most? White men. As the New York Times’ Upshot pointed out in July, “According to our estimates, Mrs. Clinton is doing better among basically every group of voters except for white men without a degree.” Put another way: “Hillary Clinton is largely performing as well or better than Barack Obama did in 2012, except among white men without a degree.” Indeed, a Monday report in The Times put it this way: “A New York Times/CBS News poll two weeks ago found that white men preferred her Republican opponent, Donald J. Trump, to Mrs. Clinton almost two to one, 55 percent to 29 percent.” These are the voters keeping Trump’s candidacy alive. He appeals to a regressive, patriarchal American whiteness in which white men prospered, in part because racial and ethnic minorities, to say nothing of women as a whole, were undervalued and underpaid, if not excluded altogether. White men reigned supreme in the idealized history, and all was good with the world. (It is curious that Trump never specifies a period when America was great in his view. Did it overlap with the women’s rights, civil rights or gay rights movements? For whom was it great?) Trump’s wall is not practical, but it is metaphor. Trump’s Muslim ban is not feasible, but it is metaphor. Trump’s huge deportation plan isn’t workable, but it is metaphor. There is a portion of the population that feels threatened by unrelenting change — immigration, globalization, terrorism, multiculturalism — and those people want someone to, metaphorically at least, build a wall around their cultural heritage, which they conflate in equal measure with American heritage. In their minds, whether explicitly or implicitly, America is white, Christian, straight and male-dominated. If you support Trump, you are on some level supporting his bigotry and racism. You don’t get to have a puppy and not pick up the poop. And acceptance of racism is an act of racism. You are convicted by your complicity. I am not accustomed to dancing around an issue; I prefer to call it what it is. I prefer to shine a bright light on it until it withers. Supporting Trump is indefensible and it makes you as much of a pariah as he is. As Toni Morrison once told Charlie Rose: “Don’t you understand that the people who do this thing, who practice racism, are bereft? There is something distorted about the psyche. It’s a huge waste, and it’s a corruption, and a distortion. Its like it’s a profound neurosis that nobody examines for what it is.” That stops here, today. For as long as racism and tribalism and xenophobia exist in this country, Trump’s foibles will not signal his ultimate failure. But let’s not let off the people who prop him up, claiming that they’re simply being party loyalists, or Hillary haters or having Supreme Court concerns. Trump is a mirror. He is a reflection of — indeed a revealing of — the ugliness that you harbor, only it is possible that you may have gone your life expressing it in ways that were more coded and politic. Trump is an unfiltered primal scream of the fragility and fear consuming white male America.
When I see women and minorities supporting Trump, it makes me think of this: <iframe width="420" height="315" src="https://www.youtube.com/embed/8T8L3xcsA3w" frameborder="0" allowfullscreen></iframe>
do you? by all means republicans, please keep thinking that the key to victory is to continue to go further to the right! thats the ticket!
For those who have been speculating that Trump's campaign is part of a conspiracy hatched with the Clintons to get Hillary Clinton elected. If so it wasn't very well thought out as his campaign is hurting his businesses. Besides the reduced traffic to his properties in the article a few other licensing deals he had overseas have collapsed because of his campaign rhetoric. http://money.cnn.com/2016/08/04/technology/trump-campaign-business-foursquare/ Trump's campaign may be hurting traffic to Trump properties Donald Trump's campaign to make America great again may not be so great for his businesses. There has been a clear decline in foot traffic to Trump-branded golf courses, hotels and casinos in the U.S. since Trump entered the presidential race last June, according to data released Thursday from Foursquare (yes, that Foursquare). The data, based on the activity of Foursquare's 50 million monthly users, shows a growing falloff in visits starting in March as Trump emerged as the frontrunner for the Republican presidential nomination. Foot traffic to Trump-branded properties was down 17% in March and April from the same period a year earlier. In July, foot traffic was down 14% year-over-year. By comparison, Foursquare's data found that traffic to those properties was "steady year-over-year" before Trump announced his candidacy. A key factor in the decline, according to the report, is that Trump's properties are overwhelmingly located in blue states where consumers are more likely to take issue with the candidate's policies and campaign rhetoric. "His hotels, casinos, and golf courses are mainly located in reliably 'blue' Democratic states, and depend highly on guests and visitors who live in the region," Foursquare's team wrote in a post sharing the data. Related: Clinton's Facebook page says 'Sign Up'; Trump's says 'Shop Now' The Trump SoHo in New York and the Trump International Hotel & Tower in Chicago are said to be two of the properties that have experienced the largest declines in foot traffic. There has also been a noticeable decline in women visiting Trump-branded properties, according to the study, perhaps reflecting the criticism that Trump insults and offends women. Reps for the Trump campaign did not immediately respond to request for comment. While the data shows a decline in traffic to stores, it doesn't make any claims about sales. It's also possible that some Foursquare users are more embarrassed to publicly check in to Trump's locations, but are still going -- though Foursquare says the data is based "mostly" on actual visits rather than self-reporting. It's worth noting that many Trump-branded properties are not actually owned by Trump. Instead, Trump often licenses his name to properties. This isn't the first study to suggest Trump the candidate is hurting Trump the businessman. One recent report from Hipmunk, an online travel service, found bookings for Trump Hotels were down 58% in the first half of 2016 compared to the same period a year earlier. Another survey late last year from BAV Consulting found the Trump brand was less associated with traits like "prestigious" and "innovative" among wealthy consumers. Foursquare, best known for letting people "check-in" to various locations, has increasingly been positioning itself as a powerhouse for consumer data. Earlier this year, it correctly predicted a decline in Chipotle (CMG) sales.
I agree with a lot of that piece and as I stated in another thread the vast majority of Trump supporters that I've seen are older white male without college degrees (in fact one posted this morning something blasting "college educated elites") who primarily live in rural or exurban area. I would hesitate to categorize them as racist. I think for most of these people they are dealing with a rapidly changing world while their own worldview hasn't changed. Why the issue of blasting PC resonates with them is that they see their culture under attack when language and attitudes that they've always held and used are now criticized even though they've never felt like they personally are racist or bigoted. It's very fitting that Clint Eastwood has become their spokesman as his characters in Grand Turino and Million Dollar Baby are archetypes of these people. Older white males who frequently and unrepentantly use terms like "gook" but will still deal with others of a different race or background on a personal basis.
"Well, you know that story I told about seeing that top secret video of a plane"... http://abcnews.go.com/Politics/trump-reverses-iran-cash-video/story?id=41141259
It sure is too bad that you can't generalize about every other group on the planet without getting called a racist.... Lucky for us we have the white male left that we can call names and generalize about how awful they are and it is perfectly acceptable. Go us.
Yeah, I think Trump will say the first thing that comes to his mind. Unfortunately for Trump it's often a lie. He'll here things and just speak as if he himself saw them.
I guessed correctly that the author of this piece was not a white male. But as a black male, the author should have known: "white male" is an abstraction, just like "black male"; in contrast, white males are individuals. While it is true that "the white male" has been on top in America almost forever, it is also true that not every individual white male has been on top, owned slaves, got invitations to dine at the White House, etc. While I myself am totally anti-Trump, I do wonder what I did to be accused of "white male fragility." The author tries to specify a subset of white males (which still is stereotyping, just on a smaller scale), but his weakness shows through in his title and his conclusion. "Fragility and fear consuming white male America"? Hey Charles M. Blow, you don't know me, so why are you writing about me in this way? In other words, the author typifies some of the stuff white males may respond to. I'm sitting here minding my own business when this guy wants to start talking smack about me. Why? In short, the author is guilty of stereotyping white males. And yeah, some people may not like that. Some white males may think they've been getting a lot of bum raps from people like Charles M. Blow, for nothing they themselves did.
Well lookie here. It appears Trump may have been right, even if he didn't know it at the time. A video was purportedly made and the footage was shown on Iranian television. http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-3725770/Could-Trump-right-Propaganda-film-suggests-Iran-DID-videotape-cash-drop-plane-photograph-shipment-cash-January-prisoner-swap.html <iframe allowfullscreen frameborder="0" width="698" height="573" scrolling="no" id="molvideoplayer" title="MailOnline Embed Player" src="http://www.dailymail.co.uk/embed/video/1317021.html"></iframe> Could Trump have been right? Propaganda film suggests Iran DID videotape cash-drop plane and photograph shipment of cash during January prisoner swap February documentary that aired on Iranian state-run TV shows nighttime flight, pallet of cash matching prisoner-swap scenario reported this week Donald Trump claimed three times this week that he had seen similar footage and that Iran had filmed the cash transfer to embarrass America He walked back that claim Friday morning, saying he had only seen archival footage of a different plane delivering hostages safely to Geneva He may have been right without knowing it: Propaganda broadcast shows the images and boasts the deal was great for Iran but terrible for the U.S. By David Martosko, Us Political Editor For Dailymail.com In Des Moines, Iowa Published: 11:40 EST, 5 August 2016 | Updated: 12:13 EST, 5 August 2016 Iranian state-run media in Tehran did indeed videotape the arrival of a January 17 flight carrying $400 million in cash from the United States – and the money itself – judging from a documentary that aired the following month in the Islamic republic. Republican presidential nominee Donald Trump has been in a firestorm of controversy since first claiming on Wednesday to have seen 'secret' footage of money being offloaded from an aircraft. He admitted Friday morning on Twitter what his campaign had said more than a day earlier, that he had seen ordinary archival footage of a different plane, carrying American hostages freed from Iran arriving in Geneva Switzerland after the money changed hands. But it turns out he may have been right without knowing it. The Iranian video was aired February 15 on the state-run Islamic Republic of Iran Broadcasting television network, as part of a documentary called 'Rules of the Game.' A narrator, speaking in Persian, describes a money-for-hostages transaction over video clips of a plane on an airport tarmac in the dead of night and a photo of a giant shipping pallet stacked with what appear to be banknotes. The federal government shipped what many are calling a ransom payment in Euros and other non-U.S. currencies. The copy of the documentary footage DailyMail.com obtained is not of high enough quality to determine which nation's banknotes are depicted. None of the footage is stamped with a date or time, making it impossible to know when it was shot. And the broadcaster blurred out one portion of the screen, covering up something resting on top of the mountain of money. But the documentary begins with a narration saying: 'In the early morning hours of January 17, 2016 at Mehrabad Airport, $400 million in cash was transported to Iran on an airplane.' The film describes the Obama administration's prisoner swap and Iran's cash windfall from Tehran's point of view as 'a win-lose deal that benefits the Islamic Republic of Iran and hurts the United States,' according to two English-language translations DailyMail.com obtained. Read more: http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/art...cash-January-prisoner-swap.html#ixzz4GUavON3i Follow us: @MailOnline on Twitter | DailyMail on Facebook
He's right that he saw a video that he didn't see? A video that the writer admits cannot be verified? We're through the looking glass.
Trump has Republicans trusting Iranian propaganda videos and going soft on Russia. Through the looking glass indeed.
No, I wanted to present an 11 year with more common sense than Democrats on here. Really you couldn't read my posts?
