Trump and Brexit Watch

Davij038
Badges: 13
Rep:
?
#1
Report Thread starter 2 years ago
#1
I had a gut feeling this would happen. Whilst I condemn the genuine racists supporting Trump and would never have voted for him it's actually easy to see why he won- imagine if you will if we had Nigel Farage against Tony Blair and we'd have the same result. Some points to consider:

1: There are many reasons why Trump won- the biggest being that Liberals swallowed their own propaganda (confirmation bias). Trump has many flaws but he is not stupid and he is not opposed to immigration.

2: Trump had a coherent platform and message: as per 1 the Democrats were content to just call everyone try didn't like a racist.

3: This is a defeat for the Republicans as much as it is for the Democrats. The old paradigms of Left/right are pretty much dead.

4: Just like Brexit facts alone are not enough to inspire support. Likewise experts are no longer trusted. It took going to university for. R to understand the concept of 'over-educated'.

5: Thinking that more than half of America is uneducated and racist will only make things worse.
0
reply
ChaoticButterfly
Badges: 20
Rep:
?
#2
Report 2 years ago
#2
Bernie had a better shot than Hilary. There was loads of Anti Establishment sentiment and Bernie was the left equivalent of that. How the **** was Hilary a good candidate on those grounds? Her pitch was more of the same with less of the charisma and liability of Obama. She was terrible candidate to put forward. But it was "her turn" so we had to.

I feel bitter about all the liberals and their fellow travellers sneering at people like me for wanting an "unalectable" lefty when we should be holding our noses and supporting Clinton. Well look where that got us.

I'm hoping for a silver lining where Trump winning will kill the "End of History" triumphalism of the "centre ground" and a Bernie 2.0 can stand and hopefully win next time.

Socialism or Barbarism.
5
reply
Davij038
Badges: 13
Rep:
?
#3
Report Thread starter 2 years ago
#3
(Original post by ChaoticButterfly)
Bernie had a better shot than Hilary. There was loads of Anti Establishment sentiment and Bernie was the left equivalent of that. How the **** was Hilary a good candidate on those grounds? Her pitch was more of the same with less of the charisma and liability of Obama. She was terrible candidate to put forward. But it was "her turn" so we had to.

I feel bitter about all the liberals and their fellow travellers sneering at people like me for wanting an "unalectable" lefty when we should be holding our noses and supporting Clinton. Well look where that got us.

I'm hoping for a silver lining where Trump winning will kill the "End of History" triumphalism of the "centre ground" and a Bernie 2.0 can stand and hopefully win next time.

Socialism or Barbarism.
Agree 100% that Bernie would have been a better candidate- though I think Donald would still have won.


As for socialism it's a dead ideology. .
0
reply
ChaoticButterfly
Badges: 20
Rep:
?
#4
Report 2 years ago
#4
(Original post by Davij038)


As for socialism it's a dead ideology. .
Agree 100% that Bernie would have been a better candidate- though I think Donald would still have won.



The Bernie Scenario is probably a worse outcome. Then the liberal "end of history" types can just blame the left.
0
reply
Diego Costa
Badges: 18
Rep:
?
#5
Report 2 years ago
#5
(Original post by ChaoticButterfly)
Agree 100% that Bernie would have been a better candidate- though I think Donald would still have won.



The Bernie Scenario is probably a worse outcome. Then the liberal "end of history" types can just blame the left.
A lot of the Hillary votes were anti-Trump votes. The same wasn't the opposite way around. Even then I know of many Bernie fans who switched to supporting Trump.
0
reply
username878267
Badges: 15
Rep:
?
#6
Report 2 years ago
#6
(Original post by ChaoticButterfly)
Agree 100% that Bernie would have been a better candidate- though I think Donald would still have won.



The Bernie Scenario is probably a worse outcome. Then the liberal "end of history" types can just blame the left.
Disagree.
Think Bernie would have wiped the floor with Trump.

None of the attack lines would have worked on him and he's inherently likeable and popular too. He would have won over voters in the key rustbelt states that Hilary failed to.
0
reply
Aniki_
Badges: 0
Rep:
?
#7
Report 2 years ago
#7
I think Trump's victory has lead to a huge political wake up call. Without the tension being released through Trump, who knows what could have happened over the next decade.
0
reply
username878267
Badges: 15
Rep:
?
#8
Report 2 years ago
#8
(Original post by ChaoticButterfly)
Bernie had a better shot than Hilary. There was loads of Anti Establishment sentiment and Bernie was the left equivalent of that. How the **** was Hilary a good candidate on those grounds? Her pitch was more of the same with less of the charisma and liability of Obama. She was terrible candidate to put forward. But it was "her turn" so we had to.

I feel bitter about all the liberals and their fellow travellers sneering at people like me for wanting an "unalectable" lefty when we should be holding our noses and supporting Clinton. Well look where that got us.

I'm hoping for a silver lining where Trump winning will kill the "End of History" triumphalism of the "centre ground" and a Bernie 2.0 can stand and hopefully win next time.

Socialism or Barbarism.
Problem is that globalisation ans neoliberalism have made the working classes more protectionist and leftist economically but more right wing socially.

Thus in Labour heartlands, the people want a higher minimum wage but less immigration and tougher on crime etc.

It's why the likes of UKIP and now May are so popular (although I don't buy for a second that they are leftist economically).
0
reply
Iknowbest
Badges: 4
Rep:
?
#9
Report 2 years ago
#9
I wanted to add some points:

1: There are many reasons why Trump won- the biggest being that Liberals swallowed their own propaganda (confirmation bias). Trump has many flaws but he is not stupid and he is not opposed to immigration.

Glad to hear the word propaganda and there was lots of this. He is not opposed to immigration just like Farage isn't, it just needs controlling. Common sense tbh!

2: Trump had a coherent platform and message: as per 1 the Democrats were content to just call everyone try didn't like a racist.

Fair Point

3: This is a defeat for the Republicans as much as it is for the Democrats. The old paradigms of Left/right are pretty much dead.

Left and Right are pretty much becoming intertwined but they certainly still exist. The Left simply want everything to be accepted.. and this is fair and it would be amazing if this was to happen. We are all human beings after all. However, news reports defending certain "groups" and even "grouping" in the 1st place causes divide and causes hatred! It actually causes more right wing attitudes to form!

The root of many problems and the fear many people feel daily is due to the main stream media and how they use this "propaganda" to support their own agendas or alignments with political parties. The power of political parties can really help certain groups to achieve their agendas.

4: Just like Brexit facts alone are not enough to inspire support. Likewise experts are no longer trusted. It took going to university for. R to understand the concept of 'over-educated'.

Facts do sway some people, however the factor that really effects people are living within the problems of our society. Far too many people are directly connected to the problems they suffer daily, and they want change. You could call this a protest vote and social media and alternative media are voices of these people who actually do want change. "Experts" are easily bought and used to aid a particular groups agenda. The more influence of the more people a person or group have, the more value in their alignment to a particular cause or group. We see this with advertisements for products! A simple comparison.

5: Thinking that more than half of America is uneducated and racist will only make things worse.

On the contrary, people are more educated than given credit for. They are educated in life with many suffering poverty and they can feel the problems within society every day. They communicate with people daily and interact with people. It becomes obvious to many people that the government are doing very little to help them and that change is needed. The only way to get change is to vote for the person who is most likely to bring them change. In this case it was Trump! Many do not care if he is racist or sexist (as portrayed by the msm) and they just want to improve their own life no matter how selfish that seems. Other people might actually like that he is racist (as portrayed by the msm) and voted due to this.. and this is not good I admit! Again though, the msm is to blame for causing most of the racism in the 1st place!

These experts who, of course, are very well educated and very intelligent are unfortunately not able to predict the future and if I am honest are disconnected to the many who are struggling daily in life and desperately want a change.
0
reply
Diego Costa
Badges: 18
Rep:
?
#10
Report 2 years ago
#10
Hillary represented the established "centre ground". People wanted an outsider like what Bernie represented. It's impossible to say whether he'd have won, but in hindsight we know that the democrats should have pushed for him.
0
reply
ChaoticButterfly
Badges: 20
Rep:
?
#11
Report 2 years ago
#11
(Original post by Bornblue)

None of the attack lines would have worked on him and he's inherently likeable and popular too. He would have won over voters in the key rustbelt states that Hilary failed to.
Hence why I am so bitter.

There is a silver light though and it is that the smug centrist liberalism has lost on its own terms and will hopefully die.
0
reply
username878267
Badges: 15
Rep:
?
#12
Report 2 years ago
#12
(Original post by ChaoticButterfly)
Hence why I am so bitter.

There is a silver light though and it is that the smug centrist liberalism has lost on its own terms and will hopefully die.
Absolutely.

Hopefully it will be the end of Blairites telling us that we need to be more right wing centrist to win an election.

You need a vision and someone who can get that across passionately.
0
reply
username878267
Badges: 15
Rep:
?
#13
Report 2 years ago
#13
(Original post by Foo.mp3)
Look deeper, and consider this analysis, which underlay much of the discontent that #TakeControl and #MAGA capitalised on
Surprised that you oppose neoliberalism.

Posted from TSR Mobile
0
reply
username878267
Badges: 15
Rep:
?
#14
Report 2 years ago
#14
(Original post by Foo.mp3)
Because?
You seem rather individualistic (an observation not an insult) and that suits the rugged individualism ethos of neoliberalism.

Posted from TSR Mobile
0
reply
Connor27
Badges: 19
Rep:
?
#15
Report 2 years ago
#15
(Original post by Bornblue)
Problem is that globalisation ans neoliberalism have made the working classes more protectionist and leftist economically but more right wing socially.

Thus in Labour heartlands, the people want a higher minimum wage but less immigration and tougher on crime etc.

It's why the likes of UKIP and now May are so popular (although I don't buy for a second that they are leftist economically).
Kek, Keynesianism is not and never was "leftist", it's essentially economic centrism.

That gripe aside though, you make a few good points and I probably agree.
0
reply
username878267
Badges: 15
Rep:
?
#16
Report 2 years ago
#16
(Original post by Connor27)
Kek, Keynesianism is not and never was "leftist", it's essentially economic centrism.

That gripe aside though, you make a few good points and I probably agree.
It's leftist in the sense that it calls for government intervention in the markets which is a leftist policy.

Posted from TSR Mobile
0
reply
Connor27
Badges: 19
Rep:
?
#17
Report 2 years ago
#17
(Original post by Bornblue)
It's leftist in the sense that it calls for government intervention in the markets which is a leftist policy.

Posted from TSR Mobile
It also calls for privatisation in some places, it's an inbetween of Marxism and Hayekism. It's just economics textbooks that present it as leftist, Keynesism is not about "sticky prices" it is about how good a state's monetary policy is.

Keynesian economics is not left wing, but it is about how the economy actually works, which is why all monetary policymakers use it.
0
reply
username878267
Badges: 15
Rep:
?
#18
Report 2 years ago
#18
(Original post by Connor27)
It also calls for privatisation in some places, it's an inbetween of Marxism and Hayekism. It's just economics textbooks that present it as leftist, Keynesism is not about "sticky prices" it is about how good a state's monetary policy is.

Keynesian economics is not left wing, but it is about how the economy actually works, which is why all monetary policymakers use it.
May's Tories have just voted to push through 3.4 by in cuts to universal credit which will hit single parents and vulnerable individuals .

So much for her being different to Cameron.

Posted from TSR Mobile
0
reply
Connor27
Badges: 19
Rep:
?
#19
Report 2 years ago
#19
(Original post by Bornblue)
May's Tories have just voted to push through 3.4 by in cuts to universal credit which will hit single parents and vulnerable individuals .

So much for her being different to Cameron.

Posted from TSR Mobile
Try harder; cutting welfare is perfectly reasonable, and most working class people support it because they see benefits claimants as lazy.

I'd advise you to look at a tax bill and look at the amount of money that goes towards "welfare" (benefits), it's disgustingly high and needs to be cut, if anything, benefits cuts are the only cuts I'd actively campaign for.

Hard working people and families shouldn't suffer for lazy people and those that fake disabilities to avoid work
1
reply
username878267
Badges: 15
Rep:
?
#20
Report 2 years ago
#20
(Original post by Connor27)
Try harder; cutting welfare is perfectly reasonable, and most working class people support it because they see benefits claimants as lazy.

I'd advise you to look at a tax bill and look at the amount of money that goes towards "welfare" (benefits), it's disgustingly high and needs to be cut, if anything, benefits cuts are the only cuts I'd actively campaign for.

Hard working people and families shouldn't suffer for lazy people and those that fake disabilities to avoid work
Ian Duncan smith was opposed to these cuts massively and he's hardly a lefty is he?

The extra 3.4 billion as Ian Duncan Smith has said, is going to hit disabled people and single parents.

Do you have evidence for a large amount of people faking disabilities? I know we live in a post truth world now where facts are an inconvenience but where is that evidence?

We also lose far, far more from tax avoidance than benefit fraud, take it you want a serious clampdown on tax avoidance then?

So far May has continued with savage welfare cuts to the most vulnerable and refused to give the NHS any more money. She's also recently sold off £700 million worth of NHS contracts to the private sector. She's very different to Cameron though isn't she?
0
reply
X

Quick Reply

Attached files
Write a reply...
Reply
new posts

All the exam results help you need

2,993

people online now

225,530

students helped last year
Latest
My Feed

See more of what you like on
The Student Room

You can personalise what you see on TSR. Tell us a little about yourself to get started.

Personalise

How are you feeling about GCSE Results Day?

Hopeful (199)
12.7%
Excited (136)
8.68%
Worried (287)
18.32%
Terrified (355)
22.65%
Meh (136)
8.68%
Confused (35)
2.23%
Putting on a brave face (217)
13.85%
Impatient (202)
12.89%

Watched Threads

View All