The Rise of Mediocre White Males

calamity said:

Something I've begun to notice is the tendency in this country to put mediocre white males into high places. No way a woman or black person reaches a position where, say, a clown like Donald Trump landed if they are just average. Hell, BO had a law degree and lifted himself up from being raised by a single mom. Trump inherited a fortune, became a so-called billionaire without even earning an MBA.

Let's look at the woman who ran against Trump. Hillary was a high achiever who grew up middle class, at best. Yet, she earned a law degree from Yale. Unlike Trump, she actually served a couple terms in the US Senate and as Secretary of State. She is highly knowledgeable of the workings of government and foreign affairs. Clown Show president was ignorant of both. Yet, mediocre white guy won the election.


So, IMO, Trump is the classic example of a mediocre white guy rising to the top just by being average. Of course, it helps when your father or grandfather overachieved, as was the case with Trump. It also helps when you can con a huge chunk of the populace into believing you are one of them by simply donning a red trucker hat. But, all in all, if Trump was wearing Obama or Hillary shoes, he'd be a nobody. Of that I have no doubt.

Click to expand...

Ikari said:

Trump was rich, our system plays to the wealthy. Hillary was rich too, she just ran a **** campaign because she was a **** candidate. She could have beat Trump had she put in the proper effort, but she underestimated his **** candidacy, she was as arrogant and blind as Trump.

In the end, what were we going to get? Some rich ass Corporate shill. Hillary would be less embarrassing globally, true, but we'd still be serving the same Corporate State under her.

It always has been, is now, and likely always will be about the Aristocracy. Perhaps it's true that if Trump started out poor that he wouldn't be rich and president, but we'd just have some other rich asshole who plays ball with the corporate elite in there instead. Trump didn't "rise to the top just be being average", he rose to the top by being rich.

Click to expand...

ocean515 said:

I think the operative word is "mediocre".

Trump inherited money. Certainly that paves some paths.

But mediocre?

Both Hillary and EX President Obama benefited from circumstances that pushed them forward. Not superior intellect.

An argument can be made that a Presidential candidate with the limited experience of EX President Obama would stand little chance of being elected President. But circumstance and timing made that possible. An intelligent, articulate Black candidate was placed on the ballot with the underlying benefit of becoming the first Black President of the United States. That is a very compelling and understandably relative reason to cast a vote for him. That had little to do with intellect.

Hillary rose to fame riding to the coat tails of her husband. Had no Bill Clinton existed in her life, it can be argued she would have remained a hard driving lawyer unknown to the masses.

President Trump overcame incredible odds to rise to become President of the United States. Love him, despise him, that is not the hallmark of a mediocre person, white, black, or orange.

This thread is little more than a dog whistle developed for distribution to the designated audience.

Click to expand...

calamity said:

Something I've begun to notice is the tendency in this country to put mediocre white males into high places. No way a woman or black person reaches a position where, say, a clown like Donald Trump landed if they are just average. Hell, BO had a law degree and lifted himself up from being raised by a single mom. Trump inherited a fortune, became a so-called billionaire without even earning an MBA.

Let's look at the woman who ran against Trump. Hillary was a high achiever who grew up middle class, at best. Yet, she earned a law degree from Yale. Unlike Trump, she actually served a couple terms in the US Senate and as Secretary of State. She is highly knowledgeable of the workings of government and foreign affairs. Clown Show president was ignorant of both. Yet, mediocre white guy won the election.


So, IMO, Trump is the classic example of a mediocre white guy rising to the top just by being average. Of course, it helps when your father or grandfather overachieved, as was the case with Trump. It also helps when you can con a huge chunk of the populace into believing you are one of them by simply donning a red trucker hat. But, all in all, if Trump was wearing Obama or Hillary shoes, he'd be a nobody. Of that I have no doubt.

Click to expand...

Ikari said:

Obama worked hard, but also he was a Chicago politician, so he was corrupt as all hell and willing to play ball. He was well spoken, and things are not typically all hard work/capability there's always some amount or right-place, right-time serendipity. Hillary did ride the coat tails of Bill, but she had her own ambitions that she tried to ride past the time when Bill could really carry here. And it turned out that she's a pretty horrible person who couldn't even beat Trump. Bill Clinton was a charismatic jerk who could get us to "believe" anything even when we knew it wasn't true. Hillary didn't have that. Trump doesn't have that either, but he is the Reality-TV President. What he DOES know is how to rack up drama and use that drama to his advantage. Doesn't know how to run a country, but he can get the ratings.

In the end, it's always just rich assholes thinking that they deserve to be there in the positions of power. The entitled rich, the new aristocracy, the Corporate Players.

Click to expand...

Ikari said:

Obama worked hard, but also he was a Chicago politician, so he was corrupt as all hell and willing to play ball. He was well spoken, and things are not typically all hard work/capability there's always some amount or right-place, right-time serendipity. Hillary did ride the coat tails of Bill, but she had her own ambitions that she tried to ride past the time when Bill could really carry here. And it turned out that she's a pretty horrible person who couldn't even beat Trump. Bill Clinton was a charismatic jerk who could get us to "believe" anything even when we knew it wasn't true. Hillary didn't have that. Trump doesn't have that either, but he is the Reality-TV President. What he DOES know is how to rack up drama and use that drama to his advantage. Doesn't know how to run a country, but he can get the ratings.

In the end, it's always just rich assholes thinking that they deserve to be there in the positions of power. The entitled rich, the new aristocracy, the Corporate Players.

Click to expand...

ocean515 said:

Well, I'm simply applying a bit of objectivity to the question, leaving out opinion and bias.

The question was not one of ability to run the country, which is simply a matter of subjective opinion, but mediocrity.

The OP is logically flawed and little more than the usual dog whistle being played from the same sheet of music.

Click to expand...

calamity said:

Not sure if being serious.

Click to expand...

calamity said:

Mediocre Trump being defined by his lack of advanced degrees, poor grasp of science, no real understanding of economics, world events, global alliances and cooperation. If not for his wealth, he'd just be some Bubba most people laugh at whenever he opens his mouth.

Click to expand...

Ikari said:

If not for his wealth, he'd just be a troll on DP like the rest of us, lol.

But I don't give Trump much beyond his ability to get the ratings and he does that through trolling and bullying. He's where he is because he's rich, his best achievements come from marketing his brand. Which, OK, I guess has some worth to it. But it's not like it's anything real, it's Paris Hilton level tripe. But if not for Bill Clinton, we likely wouldn't have heard of Hillary either. She didn't have the capability to get where she was on her own, she's actually a pretty horrible bully herself. It took the charm and swagger of Bill Clinton to propel her to the upper tiers.

Click to expand...

ocean515 said:

I imagine its a concept that is foreign to you, so I'm not surprise you are struggling with the idea.

Click to expand...

ocean515 said:

I think the operative word is "mediocre".

Trump inherited money. Certainly that paves some paths.

But mediocre?

Both Hillary and EX President Obama benefited from circumstances that pushed them forward. Not superior intellect.

An argument can be made that a Presidential candidate with the limited experience of EX President Obama would stand little chance of being elected President. But circumstance and timing made that possible. An intelligent, articulate Black candidate was placed on the ballot with the underlying benefit of becoming the first Black President of the United States. That is a very compelling and understandably relative reason to cast a vote for him. That had little to do with intellect.

Hillary rose to fame riding to the coat tails of her husband. Had no Bill Clinton existed in her life, it can be argued she would have remained a hard driving lawyer unknown to the masses.

President Trump overcame incredible odds to rise to become President of the United States. Love him, despise him, that is not the hallmark of a mediocre person, white, black, or orange.

This thread is little more than a dog whistle developed for distribution to the designated audience.

Click to expand...

calamity said:

I do not deny that Hillary rode in on the horse Bill brought to the farm. However, I think we can all see that Hillary is not average intellect but rather quite knowledgeable on matters ranging from government to science. Trump on the other hand is like the dumb salesman who has no idea how the product he is selling works but knows how to convince someone to buy it.

Click to expand...

calamity said:

No. I read the bold below and chuckled at the idea that you think you are being unbiased. :lol:

Click to expand...

Ikari said:

I think she was acquainted with government because of the time Bill was in office, from State to National. So she had experience there that Trump didn't, I'm not sure I would go all the way towards "knowledgeable", she had her own corporate backers and party players she would be placing in charge of things. But maybe that's part of the knowledge, she would certainly have had better understanding and a sense of what could be accomplished since she was on the State side of the Corporate State. As for science, I don't know how much she really knew about that. She may not have been so openly aggressive against it, but I don't know if she was "knowledgeable" about science.

Either way, without Bill, we wouldn't be talking of her. She didn't get where she got on her own, she couldn't. And in the end, we find she was a lot like Trump, except she kept much of her outbursts off of twitter and contained them behind closed doors.

Click to expand...

ocean515 said:

I see, so you are unfamiliar with the idea one can be unbiased and objective when offering an observation.

The bottom line is, the logic in your OP is fatally flawed. Frankly, to me, it doesn't exist.

As such, I believe my conclusion is accurate. It is not influenced by bias or objective.

Click to expand...

Ikari said:

Trump was rich, our system plays to the wealthy. Hillary was rich too, she just ran a **** campaign because she was a **** candidate. She could have beat Trump had she put in the proper effort, but she underestimated his **** candidacy, she was as arrogant and blind as Trump.

In the end, what were we going to get? Some rich ass Corporate shill. Hillary would be less embarrassing globally, true, but we'd still be serving the same Corporate State under her.

It always has been, is now, and likely always will be about the Aristocracy. Perhaps it's true that if Trump started out poor that he wouldn't be rich and president, but we'd just have some other rich asshole who plays ball with the corporate elite in there instead. Trump didn't "rise to the top just be being average", he rose to the top by being rich.

Click to expand...

calamity said:

Something I've begun to notice is the tendency in this country to put mediocre white males into high places. No way a woman or black person reaches a position where, say, a clown like Donald Trump landed if they are just average. Hell, BO had a law degree and lifted himself up from being raised by a single mom. Trump inherited a fortune, became a so-called billionaire without even earning an MBA.

Let's look at the woman who ran against Trump. Hillary was a high achiever who grew up middle class, at best. Yet, she earned a law degree from Yale. Unlike Trump, she actually served a couple terms in the US Senate and as Secretary of State. She is highly knowledgeable of the workings of government and foreign affairs. Clown Show president was ignorant of both. Yet, mediocre white guy won the election.


So, IMO, Trump is the classic example of a mediocre white guy rising to the top just by being average. Of course, it helps when your father or grandfather overachieved, as was the case with Trump. It also helps when you can con a huge chunk of the populace into believing you are one of them by simply donning a red trucker hat. But, all in all, if Trump was wearing Obama or Hillary shoes, he'd be a nobody. Of that I have no doubt.

Click to expand...

ocean515 said:

Well, I'm simply applying a bit of objectivity to the question, leaving out opinion and bias.

Click to expand...

ocean515 said:

Certainly there has been a rise in mediocre white males offering opinions.

Click to expand...

calamity said:

Mediocre Trump being defined by his lack of advanced degrees, poor grasp of science, no real understanding of economics, world events, global alliances and cooperation. If not for his wealth, he'd just be some Bubba most people laugh at whenever he opens his mouth.

Click to expand...

calamity said:

lol...if you are not even considering the merit of the general argument that white males need only be mediocre while people of color or women must be exceptional to achieve the same ends, then yes---you are being biased.

Click to expand...

Phys251 said:

Surprised that this discussion is reasonably positive so far.

Let's suppose for the moment that Barack Obama, a Black man, had had three kids with three different women. You think that might have mattered during his presidential run? Or what if Hillary Clinton, a woman, had had three kids via three different men? You think she would have earned the nomination, let alone a 2-million-plus popular vote win? If your answer to the first question is "no" or your answer to the second question is "yes," then I'd like you to take your head out of your ass for a change.

One of the findings in the fallout of the 2016 election was the fact that fear of cultural diversity was positively correlated with voting for Donald Trump. Why is this? We could talk for days about this one. But let's consider the flip side of that study: There was a sense of security induced by voting for the white male, even if he was clearly incompetent at the job he was applying for. And that's a phenomenon that so many women, people of color, and people of many other disenfranchised groups get that people with privilege all too often utterly, stubbornly, maddeningly, refuse to get. They simply will not listen, no matter how good the arguments are.



That is simply not possible for anyone to do. Ever. Everything we say or do, or choose not to say or do, depends on our implicit biases. There's no way around that except to address those biases and weed them out as needed.

Click to expand...