Prediction - American is going to get one radical president or another

I belive the nominees for the POTUS is going to be Bernie Sanders and Donald Trump. The forces are simply too great for anyone else to even have a chance.

Why This Year’s Christmas Season Is So Angry

"Diane Farmer, 54, is a lifelong Democrat from the New York City area now living in Palm Beach County, Fla. She attended Catholic schools and later belonged to unions while working for a phone company and then in a court clerk’s office. She voted for Barack Obama in 2008 and 2012. But Farmer says she’s never been more excited about a candidate than she is this time. Her choice? Donald Trump.

The convert to Trumpism shared her enthusiasm while stopping by glitzy Trump Tower on New York’s Fifth Avenue to pick up her fifth “Make America Great Again” cap (free with every $30 campaign contribution). “What he’s saying is what everybody’s thinking,” she said. “Too many people are getting free stuff. We should send the illegals out of the country. I want them off welfare and food stamps. Go home, and come back again when you’re ready to work.” As for the Middle East: “We should have dropped the bomb and ended the issue. We need to annihilate that, uh ...,” she said, trailing off.

This holiday season, Trump’s glowing fireplace of fury is firing up people like Farmer who used to look to the left—as well as a surprisingly wide swath of the Republican Party—for answers. He’s scoring his highest numbers ever among Republican primary voters—35 percent, according to the latest New York Times/CBS News poll. Enthusiasm for him only grew after he called for a ban on Muslims entering the country. To some, he seems divisive, but not to Farmer. “I thought Obama would be a unifier since he’s black and white and Muslim [sic]. But he’s an antagonizer,” she said. “We need to try something different. We can’t live like this.”


Yup, it’s an angry Christmas, and it’s worth thinking about why. Something has changed to create such a shift in the public’s leanings, from taking a chance on Obama’s audacity of hope to delighting in Trump’s straight-up audacity. Fear of Islamic terrorism has something to do with it. Wars in Iraq and Afghanistan that achieved approximately nothing and the stunning rise of China as a rival power have also left many Americans feeling confused and vulnerable. But the most potent fuel for Trumpism is undoubtedly the sick economy. A long stretch of underperformance has seeded mistrust in the American Dream among millions of would-be breadwinners, especially people without college educations.

As everyone knows by now, a winner-take-all economy is producing big gains for a thin stratum at the top but little for anyone else. Bernie Sanders likes to point out that the top 10th of 1 percent of families control as much wealth as the bottom 90 percent. The inflation-adjusted income of the median American household is lower now than in 2000. On average, young men are earning less after inflation than their fathers did at the same age. More than a fifth of American children live below the poverty line, according to Census Bureau data. Even though the unemployment rate is down to 5 percent and the last recession ended in 2009, 72 percent of Americans think the country is still in a recession, according to a Public Religion Research Institute survey released last month.

This isn’t good for business, which is getting targeted for blame: Eighty-six percent of respondents in the PRRI survey said corporate offshoring of jobs is somewhat or very responsible for America’s economic troubles, up from 74 percent in 2012.

Two kinds of populists come to the fore when anger over inequality and perceived injustice runs high, says Luigi Zingales. An Italian-born economist at the University of Chicago Booth School of Business and author of the 2012 book A Capitalism for the People, Zingales says Theodore Roosevelt represents the best kind of populist: someone who fought corruption and broke up monopolies to give ordinary people a chance. Trump, says Zingales, is more about affixing blame than creating opportunity. He likens him to Silvio Berlusconi, the freewheeling media magnate who was elected prime minister of Italy four times but was ultimately convicted of tax fraud. Trump and Berlusconi, Zingales adds, “are both very good at talking to the stomach of the people.”

The erosion of trust that’s both reflected in and accelerated by the Trump phenomenon has real economic consequences. Business is hard to conduct in societies with low levels of trust. The share of people who agree that “most people can be trusted” varied from a high of 66 percent in the Netherlands to a low of 3 percent in Trinidad and Tobago in the World Values Survey, 2010-14. Government and commerce can grind to a halt when trust is absent.

The U.S., with 35 percent saying most people can be trusted, is in the top third of countries for societal trust, which helps explain why it is one of the world’s richest nations. That endowment of stability doesn’t come with a lifetime guarantee, however, and U.S. politics has lately taken on a spiteful cast. “While Americans are inclined to ‘hedge’ expressions of overt animosity toward racial minorities, immigrants, gays, or other marginalized groups, they enthusiastically voice hostility for the opposing party and its supporters,” according to Fear and Loathing Across Party Lines: New Evidence on Group Polarization, a study by Stanford political scientist Shanto Iyengar and Princeton postdoctoral researcher Sean Westwood that was published this year in the American Journal of Political Science. In four experiments, the authors found that discrimination based on political affiliation “exceeds discrimination based on race.”

Marriages across party lines are down to below 10 percent from more than 30 percent in the 1960s, Iyengar says, citing others’ research. The fabric of society is fraying. “I don’t want to sound like I’m an alarmist, but I could see the possibility of violence, large-scale street movements which are politically motivated,” he says in an interview...."

http://www.bloomberg.com/news/articles/2015-12-17/why-this-year-s-christmas-season-is-so-angry
 
Last edited:
Unless Clinton gets indicted for something, Sanders has zero chance of the Dem nomination. Considering the powers that be continue to circle the wagons around Clinton, an indictment is highly unlikely.
Trump is still the hot date for republicans, but when it comes time to marry, I can't see him being taken to the alter.
Actually the election is pretty simple to forecast. Decent sized terrorist attack on the homeland next summer and Dems lose. No terror attack, Dems win. Domestic thugism during the summer might play the same as a Islamic terror attack. Other than that, all the other issues are the same old bullshit that they'll talk about and do nothing.
 
The issue.. we are having a populist revolt... true. Trump is getting votes in large part because a majority of the people want an alternative to establishment dems and republicans.

But... here is just some of the bullshit in your article. (why can't that stop making leftists arguments and just present good analysis.)



"Two kinds of populists come to the fore when anger over inequality and perceived injustice runs high, says Luigi Zingales. An Italian-born economist at the University of Chicago Booth School of Business and author of the 2012 book A Capitalism for the People, Zingales says Theodore Roosevelt represents the best kind of populist: someone who fought corruption and broke up monopolies to give ordinary people a chance. Trump, says Zingales, is more about affixing blame than creating opportunity. He likens him to Silvio Berlusconi, the freewheeling media magnate who was elected prime minister of Italy four times but was ultimately convicted of tax fraud. Trump and Berlusconi, Zingales adds, “are both very good at talking to the stomach of the people.”"
 
To claim that Trump's appeal is based on economics is the sort of marxist class theory analysis I would expect from Richter. i guess Bloomberg, with its far left slant, is close enough.

Trump's appeal begins and ends with one issue, immigration. He is the only candidate in either party who has a credible plan to get control of our borders and enforce the law. It's icing on the cake that he also is the only candidate with a credible stand on stopping the flow of potential terrorists here.

The fact that both parties bitterly oppose him on these issues has set up an outsider versus insider dynamic that also helps him with republican primary voters. They are seething with anger at the party leaders and that anger is only increasing. I honestly don't believe the leaders have any appreciation for how deep-seated the anger is. They thought they could dismiss Trump by trotting out things he said that supposedly were conservative heresy. Voters don't care because, as Ann Coulter pointed out, if we lose on immigration, nothing else matters because the entire country will turn into mexifornia.
 
  • Like
Reactions: jem
To claim that Trump's appeal is based on economics is the sort of marxist class theory analysis I would expect from Richter. i guess Bloomberg, with its far left slant, is close enough.

Trump's appeal begins and ends with one issue, immigration. He is the only candidate in either party who has a credible plan to get control of our borders and enforce the law. It's icing on the cake that he also is the only candidate with a credible stand on stopping the flow of potential terrorists here.

The fact that both parties bitterly oppose him on these issues has set up an outsider versus insider dynamic that also helps him with republican primary voters. They are seething with anger at the party leaders and that anger is only increasing. I honestly don't believe the leaders have any appreciation for how deep-seated the anger is. They thought they could dismiss Trump by trotting out things he said that supposedly were conservative heresy. Voters don't care because, as Ann Coulter pointed out, if we lose on immigration, nothing else matters because the entire country will turn into mexifornia.
no kidding, a Trump/Sanders ticket would be about unbeatable but Trump is no radical, maybe even a little left of Hillary.
 
as Ann Coulter pointed out, if we lose on immigration, nothing else matters because the entire country will turn into mexifornia.

It's not even a battle. The country is being given away... sabotaged by unfettered immigration.... because some ass-hats with power-hungry ambitions want to be elected to federal government office.
 
“While Americans are inclined to ‘hedge’ expressions of overt animosity toward racial minorities, immigrants, gays, or other marginalized groups, they enthusiastically voice hostility for the opposing party and its supporters,” according to Fear and Loathing Across Party Lines: New Evidence on Group Polarization, a study by Stanford political scientist Shanto Iyengar and Princeton postdoctoral researcher Sean Westwood that was published this year in the American Journal of Political Science. In four experiments, the authors found that discrimination based on political affiliation “exceeds discrimination based on race.”

This part of the article is totally accurate and very disturbing. Thanks, obama, clintons and mainstream media.
 
While i doubt that Trump or Bernie will end up being the nominee, there is no doubt in my mind both sides are becoming more radicalised, the internet was supposed to be a great instrument to bring all of us together but instead it has created an atmosphere where ppl are becoming more and more divided.

I belive the nominees for the POTUS is going to be Bernie Sanders and Donald Trump. The forces are simply too great for anyone else to even have a chance.
 
Back
Top