Why do educated voters LIKE Donald Trump?

Nickyjo said:

I must have missed it. When did democrats attack Muslims and suggest banning an entire religion, compare all immigrants to poisonous snakes, call Mexican migrants rapists, long for the days when hecklers were taken out on stretchers, suggest torture worse than waterboarding, and suggest war crimes or pardon war criminals as Trump has?

I am with you on the drone strikes, however.

Click to expand...

Pertaining to my list?
Several times through the last twenty years. It's just that no one cared.

Then again that was a very narrow list and vaguely worded.
When in context however and going by what was actually said. We know exactly "what" kind of Muslims were being talked about, not to mention it wasn't actually a Muslim ban and it only became that after the media started calling it as such. Much like how Trump coops everything that they say, just so he can piss them off.

We know that he wasn't talking about "all" immigrants, much the same as he wasn't during the rapist comment.
The heckler on stretchers comment was done during the time when his own people were being brutally attacked by protestors and those same protestors, so his comment was astute to say the least.

Obama has pardoned such criminals in the past, even blatant terrorist and has threated NK with total what equates to genocide. Though the lack of spine was his own problem in that regard.

OldFatGuy said:

It is misdirected question. When anyone recognizes Trump's election was not his to win, but Hilary's to lose, we begin to see the real issue is the failures of the Democrats to maintain their base in the working class, swing too far to the left, and grabbing onto every extreme policy which sways from the moderate base. On the local levels the Democrats have proved themselves corrupt and disconnected from their constituencies. Telling then what they want rather than responding to what they want. Claiming moral superiority while many Democrats were caught red handed, tried, convicted and sentenced to prison while tying racism and bigotry to justice for criminal behavior is a mockery of the desires of the moderate middle class. Worry jobs away because investment doesn't guarantee minority address when many are hanging on by their fingernails, has created a loss of confidence. The inability to field candidates without the same old empty promises and who are charismatic is a gift to the Republicans.

Having a candidate like Sanders, an ardent socialist and communist with a record of failure and rhetoric, who was never a member of the democratic party, was an insult. Having a worn out back room old time party machine politician who fumbles continually as the likely presidential candidate is another insult and without any inspiration. It is not that Trump is liked, loved or respected. It is that the democrats are mired in failure for all the wrong reasons. It has become a party of whiners, not creative solutions. It has become a party more concerned with candidates who take care of their own at the expense of the people. It has become the party of high taxes. It has become a party which threatens the well being of honest law abiding citizens with its policies of bail reforms to resolve minority criminals dominance in the prison system. It has become a party of control of personal behavior rather than one of guaranteeing freedoms of choice. It has become a party of pandering.

It is not a question of who or what Trump is perceived to be. It is a question of the failures, and continual failures of the Democratic party to provide clear and quality leadership that Americans can respect and coalesce with for the future. The vision of the Democrats it once had for doing for the real benefit of people is not there.

Life is cruel, life is a struggle, life is unfair. Whining accomplishes nothing. And you cannot cry corruption and expect it not to fall on deaf ears when you yourself is corrupt. Reformers in this nation have proved themselves their own worst enemies. As worthless and corrupt as those they accuse, rightly or not. This is a nation of people who define themselves by what they do, not by what they say will do and do not.

Click to expand...

Baloney. Being a Trump supporter can only mean one thing: You like Trump, period. If you hate the Democratic Party, you just hate them, not like Trump. If you know the year is 2020, you know Hillary Clinton has absolutely nothing to do with the topic. If you want a conservative president, the reason is you like the Republican Party. None of your complaints are related to liking Donald Trump.

Why do you like the man named Donald Trump with complete disregard to your feelings about the Democratic Party?

BTW you are wrong about Bernie Sanders (a democratic socialist) and could not be more wrong about the DNC. Reasons I hate Trump, in case you did not read all 30 pages, include the very same things you are incorrectly accusing Democrats of doing.

concernedpuma said:

Blue, why is it that you can't understand that many here don't pretend to judge others by the things they have been told of them? I wouldn't like to have Donald Trump at a backyard cookout for long, so I guess I don't like his personality. But, as a President, he does a great job. Further, I doubt if he could eat the hamburgers I cook, but he still gets my vote.
Regard,
CP

Click to expand...

Getting what job done? Have you been watching him try to play scientist and doctor, even defunding the WHO and making Dr. Anthony Fauci worry about his job security? After many people said we had the best economy ever, 100% of it crashed because Trump did nothing but ignore all the warnings about coronavirus. Meanwhile he also is cutting off food stamps to everyone who needs them at a time when the number of Americans in poverty is skyrocketing because of his own failures. His "accomplishments" are in some urns and cemeteries.

There is no reason to vote for someone you obviously know is an evil man at heart and a complete idiot who is totally unfit for the job based only on a few things he did right unless you are uneducated about him.

Blue Donkey said:

Baloney. Being a Trump supporter can only mean one thing: You like Trump, period. If you hate the Democratic Party, you just hate them, not like Trump. If you know the year is 2020, you know Hillary Clinton has absolutely nothing to do with the topic. If you want a conservative president, the reason is you like the Republican Party. None of your complaints are related to liking Donald Trump.

Why do you like the man named Donald Trump with complete disregard to your feelings about the Democratic Party?

BTW you are wrong about Bernie Sanders (a democratic socialist) and could not be more wrong about the DNC. Reasons I hate Trump, in case you did not read all 30 pages, include the very same things you are incorrectly accusing Democrats of doing.

Click to expand...

I didn't expect my missive to sink in. A bit of history for you, Donald was a life long democrat, one of the party's best fundraisers in NYC. A pal of Bill & Hil, until he expressed presidential aspirations and the inner circle laughed at him, derided him to his face. His presidency is based on his revenge for that humiliation, that betrayal of "friendship" for sale. He was far from alone, there are many others who were back stabbed after years of loyalty to the party. People who worked hard for the party's ambitions, ran into personal problems and were kicked to the gutter. It wasn't just Bill & Hil.

It was the corruption of the party machine, which awarded those who knew how to bring in cash for the sale of judgeships, no bid contracts, who placed sycophants and relatives in civil service jobs, and who when caught committed suicide like Matt Troy, got disbarred and sent to prison like Joe Filardi, or twisted the law once convicted to stay out of prison like Sheldon Silver. Minor examples of a rampant, imbued corruption. It wasn't merely NYC, it was nationwide.

It doesn't matter why you or any democrat or progressive hates Trump. I did read the thread in its entirety which is why I posted what I wrote. The tunnel vision of partisan hate creates the failures I spoke of, and will continue to do so. After an adult lifetime as a democrat backroom mover, the intensity of corruption at every level led to my walking away from it all, and I speak as businessman who's businesses were built by those backroom connections.

Sanders was a bad joke. A lifelong career socialist who got nothing done in congress, who made no friends, no alliances, and who ran on antiquated pie in sky ideas that failed long ago. He didn't have a snow ball's chance in hell of winning the presidential election. He was a ranting old fool who picked up on a swell of anti Trumpism. He caught some of the idealistic youth and as expected, he failed. Try proving Biden is not an old fumbling party hack. He is what he is, and he has little or nothing to offer that will inspire leadership and garner sufficient votes to win an election. The party machine is broken, it has strayed too far toward extremism, mouthing and pandering to minorities, for middle America to support. It has disconnected itself from the labor movement with empty promises, and in your face elitism of micromanagement of people's lives.

Donald Trump thanks you for handing him the 2020 election. Ivanka Trump thanks you for handing her the 2024 election. And don't be surprised to see Chelsea Clinton at her side during her campaign, to the dismay of Hilary. Those two are very close friends since childhood. Laugh and whine while you can, Ivanka is the Republican's Great White Hope. A mother without personal scandals, a successful business woman in her own right, a strong presence among the literati of philanthropies which is where power bases in American politics are based, and she is already campaigning. The democrats have no one to run against her, not Andy Cuomo or anyone else with the charisma and sense of quality leadership for middle America. As a businessman, I learned long ago, negative sales always fails, and the democratic party is all negative sales today.

The question is not why anyone likes Trump, it is a question of a fragmented, corrupt, leaderless democratic party disconnected from its constituents.

Rumpel said:

Let me put it this way:

Let me be clear about this one thing. The Republican Party of today no longer represents the people of this country in the way it once did. It has lost it's moral identity. Voting for the Trumps of this world is not an option.

Click to expand...

And,as usual, you are wrong. Unfortunately, voting for Trump is the ONLY option.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

OldFatGuy said:

The question is not why anyone likes Trump. It is a question of a fragmented, corrupt, leaderless Democratic Party disconnected from its constituents.

Click to expand...

If the question was anything else, I would have asked something else. It is 100% about why anyone likes Trump.

Ivanka Trump has nothing to do with this thread topic. I am only discussing her dad here. Why did you mention her?

Oborosen said:

Pertaining to my list?
Several times through the last twenty years. It's just that no one cared.

Then again that was a very narrow list and vaguely worded.
When in context however and going by what was actually said. We know exactly "what" kind of Muslims were being talked about, not to mention it wasn't actually a Muslim ban and it only became that after the media started calling it as such. Much like how Trump coops everything that they say, just so he can piss them off.
++ "Donald J Trump is calling for a total and complete shutdown of Muslims entering the United States until our country's representatives can figure out what the hell is going on." He didn't specify the "kind" of Muslims he was talking about. Because he realized or he was told how absurd that notion was, to his credit he modified the plan to include certain people from certain countries. But he still took shots, noting reports of "Middle Easterners" in the caravan, as usual offering no proof. And he suggested there was little or no vetting of Syrian refugees, when anyone familiar with the process knows it is a long one with several steps involved by several US agencies, with additional steps at the time for Syrians. Process can take more than a year from the time the refugees are examined by the UN refugee staff. Trump of course said we knew nothing about these people.

We know that he wasn't talking about "all" immigrants, much the same as he wasn't during the rapist comment.
++ There were two distinct messages, the "rapist" one about illegals (offering no proof or stats, of course), and his reading the snake poem at various times, once about Syrian refugees (i.e., legals), once about illegals, but a few other times about immigration in general, not illegal immigration.

The heckler on stretchers comment was done during the time when his own people were being brutally attacked by protestors and those same protestors, so his comment was astute to say the least.
++ Oh, great, so he was "astutely" suggesting that his people break the law because, after all, some other morons did.

Obama has pardoned such criminals in the past, even blatant terrorist and has threated NK with total what equates to genocide. Though the lack of spine was his own problem in that regard.

Click to expand...

++ Did Obama pardon US soldiers accused of war crimes, before trial? If he did, shame on him. But Trump not only suggested that US forces commit the kind of war crimes we hanged Germans for (take out their families) he pardoned those credibly accused by our own armed forces.

Nickyjo said:

++ Did Obama pardon US soldiers accused of war crimes, before trial? If he did, shame on him. But Trump not only suggested that US forces commit the kind of war crimes we hanged Germans for (take out their families) he pardoned those credibly accused by our own armed forces.

Click to expand...

"credibly accused" Yeah, so that means Biden should go to trial, as well as anyone else who's been "credibly accused" of doing something.

Good luck living by that standard when it eventually comes for someone close to you, or even yourself.

Oborosen said:

"credibly accused" Yeah, so that means Biden should go to trial, as well as anyone else who's been "credibly accused" of doing something.

Good luck living by that standard when it eventually comes for someone close to you, or even yourself.

Click to expand...

They were accused by fellow soldiers. That made the accusations credible. Credibly is defined as “in a believable and convincing way,” or “in a way that can be believed or trusted.”

Trump both suggested that the military torture and commit other war crimes, and before their trial pardoned those that were credibly (see above) accused. Simple question: do you condone war crimes? If so, petition for pardons for those Germans we hanged who did what Trump suggested in Nazi occupied Europe. And of course you’ll understand it if our captured soldiers are murdered. And by the way, my son was credibly accused of illegal drug possession. When we produced a letter from the doc who prescribed the drugs, charges dropped. That’s how the system works. We lived by that standard. No pardon necessary.

Bottom line: Trump believes in war crimes. I don’t. Whose the better American?

Nickyjo said:

They were accused by fellow soldiers. That made the accusations credible. Credibly is defined as “in a believable and convincing way,” or “in a way that can be believed or trusted.”

Trump both suggested that the military torture and commit other war crimes, and before their trial pardoned those that were credibly (see above) accused. Simple question: do you condone war crimes? If so, petition for pardons for those Germans we hanged who did what Trump suggested in Nazi occupied Europe. And of course you’ll understand it if our captured soldiers are murdered. And by the way, my son was credibly accused of illegal drug possession. When we produced a letter from the doc who prescribed the drugs, charges dropped. That’s how the system works. We lived by that standard. No pardon necessary.

Bottom line: Trump believes in war crimes. I don’t. Whose the better American?

Click to expand...

You do realize that such a standard is still being upheld. Trump has such power as is the station that he inhabits, much with the same power that every other president before him has used.
I also don't care for him talking about doing anything. Because the discussion was not what everyone tried to make it out to be and such things never even came to pass for us. So you're just saying that he "talked about" something and nothing more.

You're judging him on a moral standpoint that barely exist as it is.

Continually to use "credibly" in front of accused. Is a waste of time.
It was a tactic that was revived to use against Kavanaugh and we all saw how well that worked out for his accuser.

Then again, she did use the rise in public attention to make more than enough money. So that she could live comfortably for a long time. So it seems to have worked out just fine for her in the end.

Your concept of being a better American is not really relevant here.

Oborosen said:

You do realize that such a standard is still being upheld. Trump has such power as is the station that he inhabits, much with the same power that every other president before him has used.
I also don't care for him talking about doing anything. Because the discussion was not what everyone tried to make it out to be and such things never even came to pass for us. So you're just saying that he "talked about" something and nothing more.

You're judging him on a moral standpoint that barely exist as it is.

Continually to use "credibly" in front of accused. Is a waste of time.
It was a tactic that was revived to use against Kavanaugh and we all saw how well that worked out for his accuser.

Then again, she did use the rise in public attention to make more than enough money. So that she could live comfortably for a long time. So it seems to have worked out just fine for her in the end.

Your concept of being a better American is not really relevant here.

Click to expand...

Facts you don’t touch on: the president of the US suggested war crimes. He suggested we torture. He suggested breaking international and domestic law. That’s it. It sends a terrible message to our armed forces and to the world. It is not leadership. Those are the words of a dictator wannabe.

If you don’t like the definition of the word “credibility,” write the Merriam-Webster dictionary people. If they were “falsely accused” I wouldn’t quarrel with that phrase.

Didn't know which to choose bc both apply.. I can't imagine any doing better and if I could hahaha...Biden would be at way bottom of that list..no, wouldn't even b on it...

In the words of a new study by University of Kansas professors David N. Smith and Eric Hanley, “The decisive reason that white, male, older and less educated voters were disproportionately pro-Trump is that they shared his prejudices and wanted domineering, aggressive leaders …”

HumblePi said:

In the words of a new study by University of Kansas professors David N. Smith and Eric Hanley, “The decisive reason that white, male, older and less educated voters were disproportionately pro-Trump is that they shared his prejudices and wanted domineering, aggressive leaders …”

Click to expand...

Have a link for the study by chance?

If not, how do you know the writer isn't lying?

Nickyjo said:

Facts you don’t touch on: the president of the US suggested war crimes. He suggested we torture. He suggested breaking international and domestic law. That’s it. It sends a terrible message to our armed forces and to the world. It is not leadership. Those are the words of a dictator wannabe.

If you don’t like the definition of the word “credibility,” write the Merriam-Webster dictionary people. If they were “falsely accused” I wouldn’t quarrel with that phrase.

Click to expand...

He can talk about whatever he wants, I don't care. So long as I don't have to see our forces actually doing any of that, it's fine. You're basically arguing about something that never lead to things being done.

I have no issue with the word "credibility" but that isn't the word that we're talking about here.
We're talking about a word that was injected into something to make it seem more legitimate than what it should be considered.

Yet the caveat here, is that now that Biden has been "credibly" accused. He's garnered all of this protection and everyone seems intent on throwing the standards that they've built up over this, into the shredder.

Case in point being, I don't mind that Trump simply talked about such things. As we never came around to using them and the term "credibly accused" is only being taken to heart when it's not a democrat being accused.

It's as simple as that.

Lord of Planar said:

Have a link for the study by chance?

If not, how do you know the writer isn't lying?

Click to expand...

It sounds more like he's twisting the wording around to suit what he wants it to sound like.
Though the contents of the study most likely just say "less educated" and not unintelligent. Nor does it mean something bad when someone states domineering & aggressive. Most countries wouldn't want someone who's outward appearance is that of a spineless coward. So most of the people who make it further in such political campaigns possess such a demeanor.

Trump may be a dick with a big mouth and very little filter. But he still exudes a sense of projected strength, physical presence and a "take no **** from anyone attitude" that made him such a prime candidate.

This still looks more like much of the same crying that anti-trump personalities do, in order to make themselves feel better for losing the election.

Blue Donkey said:

This is a literal and isolated question. If all you care about is opposing the Democratic Party and supporting whoever the Republican nominee would have been, this thread is not for you. That is not liking Trump himself, just liking what he is not. I want to know why people who like Trump himself, based only on what he says and does, not any lies the conservative media tells.

Click to expand...

The more I see the over-achieving results that we have seen across the board, the less I care that he grabbed a tit or talked some sht. Many will agree regardless of education level. The question is really how do educated voters back the democrats after witnessing the follies and level of dishonesty and unfairness that they exude? We have seen the true colors of the dirty dems, and they are certainly not red white and blue. Should you really support a party that gets angrier and angrier the more America succeeds?

Blue Donkey said:

You have not proven it is not bigotry. My claim stands until you do.

Click to expand...

It’s your claim. You need to prove it.

sKiTzo said:

The more I see the over-achieving results that we have seen across the board, the less I care that he grabbed a tit or talked some sht. Many will agree regardless of education level. The question is really how do educated voters back the democrats after witnessing the follies and level of dishonesty and unfairness that they exude? We have seen the true colors of the dirty dems, and they are certainly not red white and blue. Should you really support a party that gets angrier and angrier the more America succeeds?

Click to expand...

The ONLY question is the one I asked: Why do people who are educated about Donald Trump like him?

There is NO REASON to criticize Democrats for their dishonesty as long as Republicans love the most dishonest person in America.

Aberration said:

It’s your claim. You need to prove it.

Click to expand...

I certainly will.

Blue Donkey said:

The ONLY question is the one I asked: Why do people who are educated about Donald Trump like him?

There is NO REASON to criticize Democrats for their dishonesty as long as Republicans love the most dishonest person in America.

Click to expand...

So, no amount of success matters because you believe he is dishonest? The office of POTUS isn't a personality contest.

sKiTzo said:

So, no amount of success matters because you believe he is dishonest? The office of POTUS isn't a personality contest.

Click to expand...

My question was always why do people who are educated about Donald Trump like him, not if they think he is successful as the POTUS.

BTW he is not successful as the POTUS anyway because it was all his fault that the economy crashed.

Tigerace117 said:

The Germans’ Osttrupen conscripts fought noticeably less effectively than their regular troops....as did the Volkssturm, whose main qualification was having a detectable pulse. The Italians’ performance was never especially good, and became particularly lackluster as time went on and Mussolini lost the belief of his people. The fact that the Axis Powers were virulently racist does not excuse the stupidity and bigotry of nativists here in the US.

Simple “survival instinct” does not explain why the men of the Irish Brigade, or the 442nd, would go so far above and beyond in fighting for the US.

Um....no, financial gain was one of the main ideas behind internment, along with racism. The Nativists thought the Japanese were out-competing them and were desperately to get rid of the “Yellow Peril”.

“ The deportation and incarceration were popular among many white farmers who resented the Japanese American farmers. "White American farmers admitted that their self-interest required removal of the Japanese."[48] These individuals saw internment as a convenient means of uprooting their Japanese-American competitors.

Austin E. Anson, managing secretary of the Salinas Vegetable Grower-Shipper Association, told the Saturday Evening Post in 1942:

We're charged with wanting to get rid of the Japs for selfish reasons. We do. It's a question of whether the White man lives on the Pacific Coast or the brown men. They came into this valley to work, and they stayed to take over... If all the Japs were removed tomorrow, we'd never miss them in two weeks because the White farmers can take over and produce everything the Jap grows. And we do not want them back when the war ends, either.[61]”

Internment of Japanese Americans - Wikipedia

In other words, you are ignorant about the reality of what went on, and are grasping at straws to justify nativist bigotry.

Click to expand...

Oh my. I am neither ignorant or in agreement with you. That isn't to say that you are ignorant(as you tried to pin on me) It is more to say you are a revisionist that selects one speaker, at one time, to assert your sorry view of what was.
Further, aside from your selective quote and the briefest of measure of a few fighters for Hitler, most of what you wrote isn't correct.
Again, I would repeat, reason's for joining a cause aren't the measure of combat efficiency. Surely you understand that?
Regards,
CP

concernedpuma said:

Oh my. I am neither ignorant or in agreement with you. That isn't to say that you are ignorant(as you tried to pin on me) It is more to say you are a revisionist that selects one speaker, at one time, to assert your sorry view of what was.
Further, aside from your selective quote and the briefest of measure of a few fighters for Hitler, most of what you wrote isn't correct.
Again, I would repeat, reason's for joining a cause aren't the measure of combat efficiency. Surely you understand that?
Regards,
CP

Click to expand...

They....literally flat out admitted that the “internment camps” were explicitly designed to try and get rid of the compeitition, and justified it based on racially bigotry. It’s not me saying what their beliefs were; that’s them, at the time, flat out admitting it.

As usual, you desperately try to cling to a warped, glorified version of the “good old days” where immigrants and minorities “knew their place”....in other words, typical nativist bull****.

On the other hand, the 442nd and other units like it’s amazing performance repeatedly exposed the stupidity of nativists on the battlefield, and that’s where it really counts.

Tigerace117 said:

They....literally flat out admitted that the “internment camps” were explicitly designed to try and get rid of the compeitition, and justified it based on racially bigotry. It’s not me saying what their beliefs were; that’s them, at the time, flat out admitting it.

As usual, you desperately try to cling to a warped, glorified version of the “good old days” where immigrants and minorities “knew their place”....in other words, typical nativist bull****.

On the other hand, the 442nd and other units like it’s amazing performance repeatedly exposed the stupidity of nativists on the battlefield, and that’s where it really counts.

Click to expand...

I'm guessing that you, as well as I, would like to know who "they" were, yes?. To pretend that after a dastardly attack by Japan there would be no view of commonality by the vast American public, and that the entire internment camp phenomenon was as cheap as someone making a buck, is to show an absolute disconnect with that time. Further, it is an insult to our country. You may find some satisfaction in that presentation, and by being a loner, but most don't buy your fairy tale idea that somehow bolsters your revisionism. And at long last, what is the end game you hope to achieve? Are you looking for other syncopates?
Regards,
CP