I found it very interesting - worth to read: https://www.socialeurope.eu/where-did-trumpism-come-from
I have a serious problem with the economic disparity explanation, and frankly I've been given no reason to buy it and every reason to think it's not a component at all. 1. On the day after the 2016 election, Republicans' view of the economy instantly surged into very positive territory. Did every Republican voter suddenly get $50k in their account? 2. Trump's economic policies have been neutral at best or negative at worst. His policies either had no impact, simply resulting in the continuation of the trends under the Obama terms, or they punished his voters due to the trade war with China. 3. His handling of the pandemic cratered the economy, resulting in precisely zero backlash from his base. 4. His tax break specifically targeted the richest Americans and barely trickled down to any significant degree to his most common supporters: white voters with no college education. Additionally, the stock market gains initially seen in the first two years marginally benefited these people at most. 5. His base finds absolutely zero appeal in Democratic policies that would directly address economic disparity. Everything we've seen consistently demonstrates that the core of Trumpism is cultural and not economic.
Not worth the read. It's a fairly common version of the left trying to make itself feel better. However keep spinning imaginary stories, reality is way to difficult.
It reads like terribly political bias and party propaganda written by partisans. What was written looked like a Lefty opinion presented as objective fact
The moment you typed in "tRumpist" everything else you had became irrelevant. Back to your echo-chamber, bye-bye.
I couldn't find anything wrong with that article... Seems to me tRumpism is perhaps a combination of what she describes as from bottom up, top down. I would just add this idea.... "Nobody wanted to risk anything for anybody else. Everybody was afraid they were going to lose what they had. They knew it was bad. They were just afraid it'd get worse. That's all they lived for – for things not to get worse."
From the beginning, the support for Trump originated in the same place that the Know-Nothings from the last century came from. Certainly he tapped into the frustration of generations of people who see (correctly) that the government has been in the hands of special interests for a long time. People who rightly see that the government does not govern in accordance with the Constitution, and that the government does not care for the common man. Their motives and frustrations are genuine, but Donald is just another snake oil salesman and charlatan, most recently become a vaccine salesman.
So...you were never serious about the topic of your subject line, this was simply a partisan exercise. Typical, however there may be a point at some time when you really may want to figure out where "Trumpism" came from.
There is a lot I could write about that, but I'll just try to compress it to just a small, digestible bite: Trumpism is the end result of 30 years of bipartisan consensus on economics, trade, immigration, and America's role in a post Cold War world being not only wrong, but disastrous for Americans and particularly the working class. Trumpism is a course correction to both political parties.
Your points seem valid enough for my limited understanding... I might only suggest that tRumpism is an ATTEMP at a course correction... and perhaps a desperate one at that. Whether or not there has been any significant improvement at all in those areas you mentioned is hard to say....some might even say it is worse with tRumpism.
I was very serious in my answer - I think my answer was the correct one to yours: "Not worth the read.It's a fairly common version of the left trying to make itself feel better. However keep spinning imaginary stories, reality is way to difficult.". You didn't show what was wrong or misleading in this article, so I was as serious with my answer as you with yours.
Well it was a desperate one, sure. That's why on the right 2016 was referred to as the flight 93 election. It was a gamble. But overall, it seems to have worked out. Given the foreign policy provocations over the past few years, if Hillary, or generic Republican like Jeb! were President, we would be engaging in an active war in Syria right now, fighting Syrians, Jihadi's , and Russians. Since Hillary had vowed to institute a no fly zone over Syria, we would have had an immediate military clash with Russia and we might all be smoking ruins by now. Two middle east peace treaties seem like a bonus. Trade, immigration, are less successful, but the administration has been leaning in to improve our standing in both areas and we've been going in the right way, but there is much to be done. Now what do you think is worse?
Well I've made several posts in this thread, but I think it's fair to say that #16 is a far more accurate answer than your article. Academics who regard fly over country as some alien outback are not the best gatekeepers for you to get information on topics that they don't have any knowledge of, merely prejudices.
The abstract does describe the core strategy of the Republican party, which has used this sort of appeal to build a shaky coalition between working class white folks, and the Wall Street and big oil, and secretive private billionaires that actually dictate the party’s real agenda. (Which explains why conservative groups go to such great lengths to hide where the money is coming from) But the roots are far deeper. They’re engrained in American political culture. Racism, xenophobia and fundamentalism are very common in the US. And as loudly proclaimed, accused or denied by all depending on the occasion. The article correctly described the way the Trump Administration actually works. From the day Trump embraced birtherism, the flim flam was on display. Trump played openly to bigotry, and turned that message up even louder with his 2016 campaign. He very quickly demonstrated that playing to white resentment and bigotry insured that he could lie to his audience with impunity, and they would cheer for it. The most successful cabinet secretary in the Trump Administration is Steve Mnuchin, who has diligently pursued Wall Street’s agenda. Trump’s open pandering ot the fossil fuel industry is also a nod to the real nodes of power in the GOP. Trump is just a supercharged version of the same strategy the GOP has used since the 1980’s/ Wall Street holds on to its power in government by selling social issues and racism to a southern and mid western and blue collar working class by pandering to their prejudices and fears. This class of voters does not really expect anything to get better for them. Which is why they keep voting for con men who work for Wall Street because they tell them what to be afraid of, and give then the constant reassurance that if the rich man gets richer, some crumbs will fall off the table. I’m not sure why right wing talk radio American keeps falling for this. But they’ve been falling for it for forty years.
The OP is not the only one confused. It has to be racism, right? Liberal readers are still struggling to figure out Trump's base Interesting that so many on the left just can not figure out Trumpism, while I on the other hand, have no problem understanding the left's support of Obama/Hillary/Biden. Interesting!
1. No but they gained a positive outlook knowing someone who understands the economic problems that has led to a reduced middle class is now president. 3. You will have to expand on that more. Governors decided when and how their states would shut down. Trump increased the US capabilities to respond to the threat, which was diminished thanks to the production of many of those products being sent overseas. Every attempt he made to secure our borders during the pandemic was met with resistance from democrats and their supporters. 5. This is the most accurate thing you stated. Democrat policies will not address their economic needs as they are not interested in handouts and government operated social systems. They want respectable job opportunity, low taxes and affordable insurance. Not UBI, universal healthcare, free college education and so on all via the American tax payer. The democrats have went so far left that it is a cultural problem now. I know I can't personally vote for any individual democrat because even if they had ideas I would agree with, they would have to fight their own party to implement them. Democrats refusing to condemn and put down the riots that have been going on for months is a prime example. They have to coddle these domestic terrorists to win elections and if that is their game plan they have zero support from me. It should be easy to condemn protests that resulted in riots and chaos and violence. Many of them can't do it
I had not heard that description. But then, I am no devotee of right wing talk radio or trash blogs. Your isolationism is evident, as is your world view. Only Trumpsters see abandoning the Levant, betraying the Kurds, and leaving hundreds of thousands of refugees under the merciless barrel bombs and attacks by Russians and Assad. The rest of the world saw it as an ignominius retreat and a defeat for human rights and freedom. Erdogen, Putin and Assad were delighted. Trump gave them all exactly what they wanted. Peace treaties between countries that had never been at war isn’t much of an accomplishment. Especially since they had already been doing business.