Ummm...so what? The point is that in September of last year the view of Donald Trump was different than it is today. If a poll like that was done TODAY I think you'd see Trump's support with college educated individuals to be a lot lower than it was 7 months ago.
American Democratic Socialism is leftist. You are making it much more difficult to explain than it has to be. We are not talking about other countries clearly. We are also not talking about the traditional meaning of socialism clearly. We are talking about a Democratic Socialist in American politics today. Your response is the reason why the uninformed are easily misled. Calling someone a socialist as compared to Bernie Sanders without bothering to consider the differences in types of socialist is an ignorant thing to do. It may be willfully ignorant but ignorant just the same.
I reject your argument completely. It is ridiculous to assert that to be a socialist in America you have to be pro-amnesty, pro-abortion, etc. To get elected as a socialist in America you have to be able to draw on the Democrat constituent and because of that you have to adopt views in line with mainstream Democrats on most issues, but that doesn't matter. The reason Trump isn't a socialist is not because of his ridiculous views on immigration or Muslims.
If Bernie sanders doesn't even know how to explain Democratic socialism how can you know what it means. What's the meaning of Democrat? I know the meaning isn't the same as it was 50 years ago. Funny you mention xenophobia and Democrats since some of the biggest proponents of segregation were....Democrats. Trump's policies help the working class and hurt businesses and that's what i call socialist or at least more socialist than what Democrats in the last decade have suggested.
Appreciate the discourse. The system is not corrupt but like any large bureaucratic organization or corporation run by agents representing the principals (taxpayers or shareholders) and when its spread among so many million of them, the agents believe they rule. The government is a prime example of corporate America in the early 1980's. Large organizations run mainly for the top executives with the objective of simply growing larger and granting favors. Most politicians are made by their fundraisers and then those fundraisers help their post-legacy with their foundations, libraries etc. Their use of the office typically benefits their fundraisers and donors and so ultimately the system and government is used to further individual interests as most politicians want a lifestyle not attainable through simple public service. Most will do what Clinton did, though not so blatantly, but it is perfectly legal and well within their rights to do so unless it was a quid pro quo for favors. Someone devoid of this desire that has been a pragmatist most his life and found a hole in the system and is speaking loosely due to an election I think could do well for this country in that he will scare the hell out of these lobbyists, special interests that all have one purpose: secure favorable terms for their country, corporation or organization or cause at the expense of the United States.
It's not really that funny since Democrats made a conscious decision to fundamentally shift that stance. It's also interesting the GOP made a conscious decision to go after voters that felt deserted when the Democrats changed that position.
Trump is an insider, he's been making deals and bribing politicians to screw his enemies his entire life. He's 70 but has the maturity of a 7 year old. He has no integrity, no honor, no compassion. He doesn't know anything. He's unfaithful to his friends and his family. He uses his wealth and influence to defame anyone that opposes him or angers him. He will accuse you of being a pedophile or an adulterer or a criminal, with zero evidence, and not blink an eye. He has promised everything to everyone. Name an issue and he's been on every side of it; left, right, and incoherent. No one has any idea what he would do if he had power (including Trump). If he didn't inherit his Dad's money, he would have gone broke a long time ago. We've never had a person of such low character and low quality make a serious run for the presidency (amazingly, Hillary might have held that title if not for Trump, who is exponentially worse than her).
"You know, I didn't go after Commodore until he came after me. Right? I'm a counterpuncher. And who is Commodore? Some kind of old computer without a monitor? Is that what is insulting me now."
The system is broken but Trump is a reflection of that not the solution. He comes from the system - he is big money. He will do what is best for himself not for the people. He will blame all his failures on others and spin himself to have been perfect. This man can not fix the system. One man can not fix the system. The system is broken because the people are divided. We are not a united country. We are a country that is so polarized that nothing can be agreed to - even when there is hard science. Whether it be abortion, gay rights, climate change, taxes, foreign policy, race - the diametrical opposition has become so severe that compromise is no long possible. Furthermore, corporations have so much power that they write the laws. They dictate pollitics, taxes, and economics. It's no wonder that American capitalism has reached the highest it's ever been in terms of profits and cash, while the American work languishes behind trapped in a declining standard of living where home ownership and comfort is beyond even hard working americans.
Eh, I guess we'll have to look at the data and how it changed with time if anyone happens to find it. Certainly there will be people who have jumped on or off the Trump bandwagon between September and today, but I suspect they are largely the same people. I'd be surprised to see a change in educational levels of his supporters that was more than incremental. Besides that, September to December was the timeframe in which everyone started writing about the educational disparity in Trump's base. These numbers were published at the same time that many other organizations were making the opposite argument. I think there is more to be found comparing this September analysis with another September analysis than you'll get comparing September to March. I can agree that there is a significant principal-agent problem with US (and all) governance. As citizens, we depend a great deal on the good intentions and patriotism of our leaders. And, because we have entrusted to them great power, there is a patronage system at play to game the system. But, my agreement with you ends there. I'd say: 1. In a large organization like the US government, these patronage systems are absolutely unavoidable. You can reinvent the country as much as you want and it'll keep coming back. 2. It may be a parasite on the system, but I don't believe it fundamentally compromises the value of government. It may offend our sensibilities of fairness, but we fare better with a toadie government than without one. 3. Trump is not a guy who will overturn the system. Maybe Exxon can't bribe him into doing what they want with campaign donations, for example, but Trump will still need them and their cooperation to make America great again. Besides, I doubt he even wants to. 4. I also don't see why Trump wouldn't want to enrich himself just as much as his predecessors anyway. Even if he isn't beholden to someone for helping him get elected, he may still be happy to use the influence of his position to favor an economic position that will double his money later down the road. Sure, he's already a billionaire. But, even when he was a millionaire who didn't need any more money, he still worked to make more. Why not more still? People don't stop trying to enrich themselves. 5. The system is bigger than Trump or any one guy, no matter the office. I doubt the illuminati are shaking in their boots. Even if Trump is everything you think he is and he fights the foreign partners, the corporate interests, and everybody else to maximize America's interests, there's still Congress, the Supreme Court, the state governors, the regulators -- there's a ton of people and organizations with a dog in the race. There is a great robustness in our government. One naysayer will get absolutely buried by everybody else. So I don't see it. You should vote your conscience. But, I don't see the problem like you do, I don't think the solution fits anyway, and I certainly don't think Trump is the man for the task. I can agree to disagree and hope and pray we never find out what Trump would be like as a president.
If he can't get anything done because Congress make the laws while Supreme Court enforces them, then why are people so afraid he'll win?
You're drinking the cool-aid if you think any politician whether democrat or republican has this character you speak of? Ronald Reagan was a divorced ex liberal versus Jimmy Carter a once married farmer but who was a better president? The problem with the republicans is they haven't presented a candidate in over 20 years that didn't come from a Political Family. You don't get the best and brightest but new versions of the old class. Now many like the Romney's and the Bush's and all that but I for one do not like that at all.
We may be divided, but I think we can all agree that proposing to put nuclear weapons in the hands of the only country on earth that's ever been attacked by nuclear weapon, by us, to boot, is a horrible, horrible idea.
Republicans can't get the best and brightest because the candidates who do have the greatest intellects are too nuanced or moderate for the right wing of the party. Republicans are going to only push ideologues or some kind of "next Ronnie Reagan" - who by the way, was no genius and analysis of his writings and speeches put him at 115 - above average but below the average president.
It's a problem of the Democrats as well. Hillary has basically become Bernie Sanders in order to beat him. College for free! Bring it on! Healthcare free! Let's Do it! Who's going to pay for it? Wall St?! (after paying her of course) Knowledge and pragmatism is more critical than genius in terms of successful people.
Obamacare was the brainchild of New Gingrich and tested by Mitt Romney. It was only toxic to your party after Obama decided to put it into effect falsely thinking Republicans would go along with it since it was their plan. Democratic party is very tightly entwined with wall street, if not as much as the republican party. So I really don't know what you are writing here. Trump is the one advocating free health care for all and that's the guy you are planning to vote for. So maybe you just don't really understand the candidate's platform.
I didn't read the OP, but I assume that it said something about lacking role models growing up and not going to school beyond the 3rd grade. Perhaps something in there about a traumatic experience that led to becoming a pretty awful person that is not only racist but that also hates women as well. For someone who read, does that about sum it up?
Insiders bought and paid for fat cats big pharma oil jewish lobby SUV mcmansion PC urban sprawl crony capitalism GMOs
