Is Anti-Trump Hysteria America's Most Ridiculous Moment?
S E E D E D C O N T E N T
I don't have a crystal ball, but you don't need one to know that, ten or twenty years hence, President Trump will not be remembered as "literally Hitler." The now-coming-of-age SJWs who quake in fear at night over Trump's rhetoric will get older and will eventually redirect their energies into more productive activities like a career and family.Sure, they'll probably be replaced by a new crop of young, left-wing idealists at some point down the road, but like the generation of hippies before them who later ushered in Reagan-era conservatism, the modern SJW may simply wake up one day and realize that there are far scarier things in this world than President Trump.
As for those twenty-somethings today who spend their afternoons in safe spacesprovided by their college, or attending protests wearing full-body vagina suits, or pointlessly screaming at the sky, I wonder whether they will look back ten years from now and think, "Man, what I did back then was so brave" – or will they come to the realization that they took part in what is, and hopefully always will be, America's most ridiculous moment?
That's what anti-Trump hysteria is: our most ridiculous moment as a nation. These puppets at the end of the strings just don't know it yet.
To pretend all of these theatrics are happening because Donald Trump is actually some right-wing radical should be laughable. Consider the facts.
First, there's the border security issue. The hottest-selling snake oil peddled by Democrats is that Trump is a racist for wanting to take measures to strengthen border security and enforce federal laws. But until recently, nearly all Democrats advocated the same thing. Despite his executive orders to undermine federal immigration laws during his presidency, Barack Obama said in 2006 that "we cannot allow people to pour into the U.S. undetected, undocumented, and unchecked. Americans are right to demand better border security."
A greater percentage of the Hispanic, black, and Asian racial demographics voted for Trump than Mitt Romney, meaning that Trump is actually more attractive to minority voters than the more traditional Republicans who'd run before him. And where the data exist, they show that minority support is increasing with his presidency.
Trump offered a better economy, fueled by reduced regulation and lower taxes, which would allow more individuals within all communities to thrive. Broadly, he offered a promise that he would seek to cauterize the massive influx of illegal alien trespassers who compete for wages in unskilled labor markets, who, additionally, take advantage of taxpayer-funded education, or social programs like welfare which are designed to uniquely benefit American citizens, not non-citizens.
"What do you have to lose?" Trump askedthe black community. He then won an 8% share of the black vote in 2016. That's not much, but it's about 33% higher than Mitt Romney enjoyed in 2012. Since, his approval rating among blacks has leapt higher. Perhaps due to a black unemployment rate that is lower than ever since it began being tracked by the Department of Labor in 1972, or due to support from Kanye West and rising conservative stars like Candace Owens, Trump now enjoys, as of two months ago, polling data showing support as high as 40% (Rasmussen). Some claim that that number is high, but does it matter? As Victor Davis Hanson writes in the Washington Post, even "20 percent African-American support for Mr. Trump would all but dismantle Democratic Party hopes for 2020."
What about Hispanics? Don't they hate all his talk about enforcing immigration laws and his rhetoric about dangerous aliens who enter our country illegally? Media talking heads tell us so, but the data say otherwise.
Twenty-nine percent of Latinos voted for Trump in 2016, two points more than Romney, and they, too, are warming up to President Trump. As of October, he enjoyed approval ratings of up to 41% versus "Barack Obama's 49% approval rating among the same demographic at roughly the same time in his presidency," lamentsLeon Krauze at Slate.
But Muslims hate Trump for his proposed banning of immigration from Muslim countries with ties to terrorism, right? Well, he held this same position in the campaign, and nearly three times as many Muslims voted for Trump than Romney.
Not to put too fine a point on this, but it wasn't Trump's being a right-wing radical that won him the election. It was lower-income, moderate Democrats who ultimately secured his presidency in 2016, not the wealthy or the right-wing fringe, as so many leftists believe.
Consider this. Romney won 54% of the $100K-plus income demographic in 2012, while getting just 38% of the greater than $50K-earners. Trump, on the other hand, won only 47% of the $100K-plus-earners, but 41% of the greater than $50K-earners (hint: there are a lot more of the latter).
Perhaps most importantly, his campaign rhetoric was attractive to Democrat voters in Blue Wall states like Pennsylvania, Wisconsin, Indiana, and Michigan because he campaigned on a desire to protect industry, via tariffs, in these highly unionized states (Trump won 4% more support from union members in 2016 than Romney in 2012 and perhaps even did better than Reagan in courting unions). Entitlement reform, it should be noted, was not on his to-do list. He was adamant that America needs more, not less, spending on infrastructure. These are traditionally Democrat positions, which he employed to win their votes.
In other words, Trump was so balanced a candidate that he not only spoke to much of the traditionally Republican base, but caused a political defection from many moderate Democrats. And not only did he win a greater share of votes among the coveted minority demographics whom Democrats had believed to be perennial Democrat voters for decades to come, but his support among those demographics is increasing.
With all of that in mind, it's understandable that young, crazily idealistic SJWs are frustrated by the fact that the rest of America doesn't tilt at their windmills. Their response is to childishly scream at the sky and crawl into their safe spaces, emerging occasionally to assert that Trump is a Nazi.
When these young people look back at this moment, ten or twenty years from now, will they recognize how ridiculous all of that is?
There's evidence that they've already begun to do so. Over the last two years, support for Democrats among Millennials has plunged by nearly ten points. Perhaps an Investor's Business Daily editorial sums upthe reason for this best:
[A] funny thing happened over the last two years. The millennial generation started growing up.
Here's hoping they continue on that path.
Tags
Who is online
73 visitors
“Consider this. Romney won 54% of the $100K-plus income demographic in 2012, while getting just 38% of the greater than $50K-earners. Trump, on the other hand, won only 47% of the $100K-plus-earners, but 41% of the greater than $50K-earners (hint: there are a lot more of the latter).
Perhaps most importantly, his campaign rhetoric was attractive to Democrat voters in Blue Wall states like Pennsylvania, Wisconsin, Indiana, and Michigan because he campaigned on a desire to protect industry, via tariffs, in these highly unionized states (Trump won 4% more support from union members in 2016 than Romney in 2012 and perhaps even did better than Reagan in courting unions). Entitlement reform, it should be noted, was not on his to-do list. He was adamant that America needs more, not less, spending on infrastructure. These are traditionally Democrat positions, which he employed to win their votes.
In other words, Trump was so balanced a candidate that he not only spoke to much of the traditionally Republican base, but caused a political defection from many moderate Democrats. And not only did he win a greater share of votes among the coveted minority demographics whom Democrats had believed to be perennial Democrat voters for decades to come, but his support among those demographics is increasing.
With all of that in mind, it's understandable that young, crazily idealistic SJWs are frustrated by the fact that the rest of America doesn't tilt at their windmills. Their response is to childishly scream at the sky and crawl into their safe spaces, emerging occasionally to assert that Trump is a Nazi.”
Our most ridiculous moment is that rump is 'president'
Wouldn't that be electing Hillaryious Hillary as Democratic rep for President?
Thank god that nasty biatch lost.
Indeed. We all dodged a bullet there.
The sheer hysteria of the anti Trump resistance is the most ridiculous thing that is happening in this country right now. But then again, hysterics is all that they have left.
Not surprisingly, this article is ludicrous. Hillary Clinton did take the Great Lakes region for granted and she paid the price by losing the majority of the Great Lakes states on election night. But since then Trump's ratings have fallen badly in that region and in the recent mid terms the republicans lost almost across the board in the region. Trump is toast if he can't carry the Great Lakes region again and there is no reason to believe he can. People have come to clearly realize he is unfit to be president of the United States.
The populace was quick to act on a statement like that when it came to Hillary.
Funny though....Money Hungry Liberals (Clintons) loved having Trump around.....before they didn't !
Trump is great and is doing a great job. As for Hillary, she abandoned the Great Lakes area because she has nothing to say to the working people she and her party abandoned in favor of the bi coastal elite techies.
This is brilliant.
I dislike Donald Trump. But the hysteria is ridiculous. That is accentuated by the fact that the "establishment" today consists largely of people who could think of no greater insult at the time.
I agree that the anti Trump hysteria is simply ridiculous. Both parties establishments are ridiculous as well.
LOL I noticed You left out the most ridiculous character of all, the one at top, the most grandiose, unpredictable wild card in the whole house of cards that we call the world.
Dare we speak it's name ? trump
.....................................................................................
PS: and as to your future reply .... LOL
Don't bother wasting your time, until the man changes, my opinion of him will not.
Which does nothing to excuse the bat shit crazy leftists with rampant TDS at all levels of power. The left likes to pretend they are the grownups in the room, nothing is further from the truth.
Can't stand Trump. Didn't vote for him or the wicked witch of the east Hillary. I will give Trump credit when he does something I agree with. I will speak out against him when he doesn't. Same as I did with Bush Sr, Clinton, Bush Jr, and Obama.
We have survived several below the bar presidents. We will survive Trump, and the next disaster that is elected. (We have a really shitty track record going, and are on a downward slope).
No one is asking you change your opinion of Trump. Nothing written will make me like him any better; but the left needs to be called, and forced to work for the betterment of the country. Even if they can't stand Trump. Not use their hatred as an excuse to sink to Trump's level.
I agree,
But they probably consider it "Counter punching" where that came from who knows...
To exspect the opposition to continuously take the high ground is IMO kinda unrealistic. It wasn't the case when Obama was in office, it's not now and like you said we seem to be choosing worse and worse, actually we are getting worse and worse to choose from.
Hopefully soon that trend will reverse or we're all screwed sooner or later.
I believe the term the left used for Republican obstruction was racism. Repeatedly and loudly. To the point it lost any meaning. I guess the right could scream racism as well, as the left loves to point out Trump is orange. That has to be a very small minority of the population.
Don't let Obama off the hook- he was divisive as hell. You don't tell the opposition to, "sit at the back of the bus", you don't tell a large audience of illegal immigrants "we will punish our enemies", and you sure as hell don't use the IRS and other branches of government to attack the opposition.
Sucks having a two party system; and we have to play by their rules. They can roll out as radical, unqualified, crass, and criminal of candidates as they want- and one of the two is still guaranteed to get elected. The sheeple are too afraid to let the other candidate win, than risk voting third party. Last election was the perfect example. I had close to 100 people I thought would vote for Gary Johnson in my district, even help a few register to vote- they couldn't stand Trump or Hillary. Come election day I think my district had 10 people vote for Johnson. We had a much higher voter turnout than expected; so chances are the other 90 plus gave into their fear and went Trump or Hillary. Will never waste my time like that again. We are stuck on stupid and proud of it.
We survived several bad presidents in a row. We will survive Trump. The less anyone needs to rely on the government the better.
The more informed left is starting to get it. This is from the Nation, a step up in left wing journalism from the Huffpo Daily kos dreck that pollutes this place.
Far from being a sophisticated propaganda campaign, it was small, amateurish, and mostly unrelated to the 2016 election.
There’s a more informed left?
Right. Nothing to see here
What a cogent comment! Head in the sand again?
The thing I hate is that there is plenty of legitimate stuff to criticize Trump for. Plenty.
But he gets attacked for stupid garbage like feeding fast food to a football team. I mean go ahead and joke about it a little, but don't be so serious. Trump joked about Melania making salads and some woman on CNN attacked him for being sexist . Also, Trump said the burgers were "piled up a mile high" and incredibly, The Washington Post actually "fact-checked" it . See, that's insane. And unbelievably stupid.
There's other stuff too, like this wall nonsense. Fighting illegal immigration and building a barrier was a bipartisan idea for many years. But Trump wants to finish the job and suddenly it's the most abhorrent idea since the Holocaust. It shouldn't even be controversial. Ten years ago, it wasn't.
I agree, I dont think all the nit pickin does anything but actually take away from and confuse the real crap wrong with this man and his ways and means of abolishment.
It's harder to see the rotten tree in a cloudy forest.
of course needed to escalate it up to a Great Wall.
Then slightly back off but still usually calling it a Wall. When he finally backed off on his Wall, then it became We do it TODAY. Always grandiose, this one.
Well when scaled back to reality, we already have been working on a protective fence that the border patrol wants and needs for years, trump method of getting funding is also grandiose, unrealistic and soon will need to be scaled back.
That's trump.
Have to disagree, Steve.
I don't recall any Democrats say they wanted a wall, partisan or non-partisan. Some have said from time to time that they thought that maybe there should more security at the southern border, but I don't remember any walls mentioned.
Me either and I doubt we ever do. No one till trump envisioned a Great Wall. Many dems already did vote for funding a fence though.
Wall/fence/barrier. I see no important difference. All I see is semantics. The goal and the structure built to achieve that goal is what matters. If the guys puts his names on buildings and plates everything in gold wants to call it a Great Wall, let him. Just build the thing that needs building. It is already apparent to anyone paying attention that the experts (Border Patrol) are directing the design of that structure.
For example, they talk about wanting to see through it, and Trump has acknowledged the wisdom of that. By the way, we have long stretches of fence/barrier right now that you can't see through.
Is this a fence or wall? Does it really matter?
To people whom word do matter... Yes, A wall is a wall and a fence is a fence.
Just like an apple is an apple and an orange is an orange.
President trump should learn that, as he is now the most powerful human on the planet.
I dont really have a problem with that, as long as he is the one paying for it.
So, looking at my pictures above, are those fences or walls? And how do you decide?
The taxpayers already pay for whatever border security is deemed appropriate. The Border Patrol is asking for more physical barriers. Why shouldn't tax payers pay for that as well?
None of those are walls. They are fences and the first one is really weak.
This is a wall:
Symbol of aggression: Palestinians climb over a section of Israel's separation wall near Qalandia checkpoint between Ramallah to enter Jerusalem for Friday prayer in the al-Aqsa mosque compound, Islam's third-holiest site, during the holy month of Ramadan last month
Notice how effective it is.
What makes it a fence?
A fence is a structure that is easy to put up and is meant to give you either privacy or define a space. It is not meant to keep anyone out, per se.
as per definition:
A fence is a usually wooden or metal structure that encloses a yard, pasture, or other area. ... The difference between a fence and a wall is that you can almost always see through a fence , at least to some degree, while a wall is solid.
Fences, decided by depth. A wall has some depth a fence is thin.
I have never heard of a 3 ft thick fence, but I have heard of a 3 ft thick wall.
Which is the reason they put up fences around pools./S
My back yard is surrounded by an 8 foot high slatted wood fence. You can see through it- it you look at the correct angle. It is meant to keep 2 very large slobbering dogs, and 1 tasmanian devil (That passes for a dog on its calmer days) in- and by necessity everything else out.
You could climb the fence. I have done so several times. I live there, they know me. Strangers on the other hand would find themselves quickly grounded by one large dog desperately trying to give them a bath to show it loves everyone; while the other large dog tries to deafen them forever with continuous barking in their ear; and the devil tries to tear their pant leg off. We do have 3 beware of dog signs. They would never hurt anyone; but they don't make signs for "Beware of dogs, only a danger to those that don't like slobber; want to keep their hearing; and like their clothes"
The fence is meant as a deterrent, same as a wall. Both can be scaled, or dug under. Their purpose is to slow down the average person until the authorities can arrive. Not stop them.
So the objection to Trump's goal is that what he wants to build is too thick?
I don't think any of the prototypes offered (and approved of by Trump, btw) are anywhere near that thick. They're probably all less than a foot except maybe at the top.
OK but what we have in place is often called a fence and yet its sole purpose is to help keep people out. If we wanted to merely define a space, we could have just painted a line or used some chalk like we'd use on a baseball field. We could make one big foul line.
And I think in most places, the Border Patrol would prefer to have something they could see through. Trump is on record as supporting this.
I don't think any of the prototypes offered (and approved of by Trump, btw) are anywhere near what he originally had in mind when he first called for a great wall.
As I have stated before trumps solutions always seem grandiose. over the top and therefore unrealistic, once scaled down to reality many times they are feasible.
A fence is what border patrol says is whats needed and what they want, NOW trump is changing what he says he wants. Unfortunately, now he wants it all and he wants it now. ... LOL Who doesn't want what they want that way, but who gets it ? Children, usually not adults.
My question is what's next,
The pied piper story comes to mind. One man hired to solve the problem, at his price.
What next will donny want so bad he's willing to do anything to get it, and will we give it to him ? Bad precedent to set IMO.
So....Trump aside....what's your opinion on giving the Border Patrol what they ask for?
Personally, I don't give a shit about Trump. If law enforcement requests something, I'm inclined to give it to them. Trump is not in Laredo or El Paso trying to do an impossible job with no tools. They are.
I'm of the opinion most people know what they need to do their job, I believe the border patrol is no exception. They probably know just what is needed, ask em !
I doubt its unreasonable, we should then find a way to fund what they need. Unfortunately many in congress seem to have decided compromising is a bad word. This wouldn't be compromising this would be govng the people we hire the tools to do the job we hired then to do.
You are correct get the politics and the politicians out of this and the problem will be solved.
And that is the bottom line. Support our law enforcement including the Border Patrol and ICE. Blue lives matter.
Why is the gov't shutdown over what is basically policy? Why didn't republicans do this when they had the power? Trump said Mexico would pay, US taxpayers don't want to pay, and they don't want his 'wall'. You seem to think you have the right to decide your tax dollars don't pay for abortion. Mine won't pay for the wall.
And it's getting insulting to listen to conservatives whine about TDS (like they would know, they were on a years long birther crusade). Trump is obviously Putin's puppet, and apparently some in the gop may be as well, seems like they want to reward the Russian who took Manaforts voter info to give to Putin. Anybody who paid attention can see Trump is compromised and is not working for the good of the USA. Putin is ecstatic with Trump's shutdown, now our economy is losing money every day for nothing. I can list the ways Trump is helping Russia and Russia is helping Trump. Shall I? Not hard to line up the links.
Who's going to pay for the wall? Let us count all the lies.
We don't have the right to decide where our tax dollars go, but the LAW says tax dollars don't pay for abortion. Which is a far cry from US deciding. Get your Congress critters to change the law if that is what you want. Democrats do have the majority on the House.
If Congress appropriates the funds, yes, your tax dollars will pay for the wall.
Is who PAYS for the wall the reason for your opposition to it?
Simple fact is that government could reopen tomorrow if either side wanted it to.
This is all Trump, McConnell could call a vote right now and pass what the republicans already passed before the shutdown, which, to remind the forgetful, was the THIRD REPUBLICAN SHUTDOWN IN 2018! This is still their shutdown, caused by Trump, who takes his policy advice from Hannity and Coulter. The deal was done, Trump is the one who pivoted on a dime, as usual. And Americans know it. McConnell and Trump hold the power. To repeat myself, Trump and the gop had 2 full years to fund the wall. They didn't even try until Hannity told them to. This is all on them, costing billions to the economy that are just lost.
By the way, how do you feel about Trump meeting privately with Putin, destroying notes, and not telling ANY AMERICAN WHAT WAS SAID? If you are ok with that, why is it ok for the Russians to know what was said and not Americans intel? Not American anything actually.
Mexico was supposed to pay for that wall that is suddenly a priority after 2 years? Money for that wall was NOT PUT IN THE BUDGET BY REPUBLICANS! They passed the bill without it! And when they tried to change their mind, IT DIDN'T PASS! We don't want to pay, and dems will make sure we don't. Simple, they were elected to make sure we don't pay, and are a check on Trump and the gop. We sure as hell aren't paying now just because Trump got orders from Hannity. This shutdown can be over right now, as soon as McConnell and Trump want it bad enough. It has always been that simple. Fortunately Americans aren't buying the Trump/gop BS and place the blame right on Trump. McConnell hid for a while, but people noticed and are flushing him out
The simple fact that you refuse to acknowledge is that the govt. could reopen ANY time either side chooses.
What part of that is confusing?
Using that rather dubious lofgic, the same can be said for virtually anything the govt. does.
If a prior Congress didn't appropriate money for something, then of course that means no future Congress can, right?
The part where we are supposed to allow a moron who decided to change the parameters on the bill after it was passed, a full on republican bill. The part where the moron was told by far right media personality Hannity to shutdown the gov't for a wall the gop didn't fund for 2 full years. The part where republicans are willing to protect Trump over country.
Trump and McConnell decided to shutdown the gov't, and they can open it at any time. You know, that 3rd gop shutdown of 2018 that seeped into 2019 thanks to the aforementioned clowns.
It's really Trump doing it, not Republicans. Frankly, that's to his credit, in my opinion, but he should have done it before. He could have held up the budget last year to do this. But now with Democrats controlling the House, it's easier to make everyone go all tribal over it.
I was frankly amazed and disappointed to see how spineless the Republicans were on immigration after Trump took office. Republicans are more than happy to accuse the Democrats of being the open borders party but then they don't want to secure the border themselves because (I believe) they're afraid some Democrat will call them racist or fascist. It's very sad.
The same holds with the healthcare issue. It's beyond incompetent to repeal Obamacare 50-something times without a clue as to what you would replace it with.
Democrats can reopen the government any time they want to.
So can Republicans.
To deny the facts is pointless.
When they agree to fund a portion of the border barriers as part of a grand deal the government will reopen.
And, when Hell freezes over people there can finally go ice skating, too..
Seems like lots of Democrats fail to realize that Democrats can open the govt. any old time they want to.
So far, they don't want to.
As far as I’m concerned the government can stay in partial shutdown until hell freezes over if it takes that long for border barriers to be a part of the deal.
Yep, must be hell up there in northern California. All them illegals walking in your yard.
So let's fuck everyone over, just because I want something...
[Removed]
[Deleted]
Ding! We have a winner.
Comparatively, it is an excellent use of their time.
My alarm system is very effective. Perhaps we should place ADT signs along the border.
Now that is silly.
A home alarm system from the pacific to the gulf. Sounds good! 👌
Ring or SimpliSafe. We can even get Democrats to support it!
Think of ALLLL those folks on the border with currently lousy internet. We will bring them blazing speeds!
Hey, we can take some of the money earmarked for that purpose, right?
Gotta laugh when people try to say getting 8% of a demographic is a win.
I wonder how many people would vote for Rump now, especially those furloughed workers. Hmmmmmmm
Naw - that would be the birther movement.
Don't sell the Truthers, or those that believe Russiagate short. They are every bit the equals of the birther movement.
So, you agree that the "anti-Trump hysteria" is not the most ridiculous?
I think we once again got taken cause it doesn't seem to have worked. Whats left after draining the swamp stinks worse than ever IMO. No wonder drain any swamp and whats left is pure shit, nothing you'd care to build a bnation on for sure.
That's why we still have the everglades.
Is Anti-Trump Hysteria America's Most Ridiculous Moment?
No, I would have to say that in my opinion Mr. Trump himself is most likely our most ridiculous segment in time (if it only were a moment), although the Pet Rock mania runs a close second.