Pages

Monday, June 6, 2016

Trump Circa 1987 and When Was America Last Great?

Chuck Todd rather mischievously once asked Trump when America was great. Trump said some nice things about Ronald Reagan. Todd then showed some footage of Trump in 1987 when he didn't seem to think it was so great either.

Trump in 1987:

"Trump began by telling the people who were there that he wouldn’t run for president in 1988, which disappointed some, especially Dunbar. Then Trump railed, with no notes, and for roughly the next half hour, about Japan, Iran, Saudi Arabia, Kuwait, Washington, Wall Street, politicians, economists and “nice people” of whom he had “had enough,” he said. This country was facing “disaster” and was “being kicked around.” Other countries were “laughing at us.”

“It makes me sick,” Trump said.

“If the right man doesn’t get into office,” he warned the Rotarians, “you’re going to see a catastrophe in this country in the next four years like you’re never going to believe. And then you’ll be begging for the right man.”

Read more: http://www.politico.com/magazine/story/2016/02/donald-trump-first-campaign-speech-new-hampshire-1987-213595#ixzz4AozkZYen

My theory of when America was great in Trump''s mind is pre 1965. Pre civil rights, pre LBJ signing civil rights. Remember that a major part of civil rights was immigration reform. The country had been strict in immigration from 1925 through 1964, especially for nonwhite immigration.

Civil rights. LBJ's bills, changed all that.

This is when America was last great for Trump and his millions of Dixiecrat supporters.

The reason for this is because Trump and his supporters are racists.

http://lastmenandovermen.blogspot.com/2016/06/we-finally-get-what-trump-means-by.html

http://lastmenandovermen.blogspot.com/2016/06/donald-trumps-kkk-connections-go-back.html

5 comments:

  1. Interesting theory. An alternative hypothesis (that I just made up) is that with Trump there's no there there (think American Psycho ("although there's an idea of Patrick Bateman, an abstraction.... I simply am not there")). If what looked like to him a real opportunity to "kick ass" and be glorified and worshiped and financially enriched as a black man riling up a black mob against whitey, he just might put on black face and give it a go. I admit, not terribly likely ... but perhaps there's an element of that to the man.

    Also, you might like this: I listened to a "Rationally Speaking" podcast last night that was pretty fascinating (transcripts are available as well). The subject was why it's so difficult to change people's minds. The author of a new book on the subject (currently being written) used Trump supporters as an example. He went to a Trump rally (some months back) and asked people why they liked Trump. He then asked them what they thought of Trump claiming that 1000s of Muslims were cheering in New Jersey on 9/11, and also let them know that not even Fox News was backing that story (i.e. that it was certainly a false story). He said Trump supporters responded to this information in one of three ways:

    1. Said that all politicians lie, and that Trump's lies were intended to serve a greater good so they were OK with it. This was the smallest of the three groups.

    2. Said that it DID happen just the way Trump said and that those who said otherwise were either part of a media conspiracy against Trump or were being duped by the conspiracy.

    3. Misheard him and said "No, that didn't happen." And then when he explained that it was Trump (not the media) that said it happened, they abruptly changed their mind and said it DID happen just the way Trump said.

    But Mike, beyond that, the podcast is very interesting, although difficult to follow because of all the tangents. However, then eventually come back from all the tangents (nearly all) though. It gets to the heart of convincing people. Convincing people with evidence is VERY difficult! He has an example of a guy that was (a 9/11 truther... sorry Mike), but the amount of evidence (actual, physical evidence) required was astounding. Instead he highlights another technique. It's really the Socratic method... the same (or similar at least) method touted by philosopher Peter Boghossian and his "street epistemologist" 'disciples' ... like youtuber Anthony Magnabosco.

    The RS podcast interviewee (David McRaney) goes over a quick review of a whole bunch of books that have come out on this subject, some of them recently.

    He also cites a group in Los Angeles that teaches people how to do this. A super interesting technique! Success rates seem small (maybe 8% to 15% tops), but still, that's not bad when you think about it. Certainly enough to swing and election (for example).

    ReplyDelete
  2. I really have decided that Trump is powered by racial grievances as much as anything.

    Which is not to disagree he's also power mad.

    ReplyDelete
  3. But that Politico piece gets it right I think. His position on healthcare or taxes might change but the nativism and racism is always there.

    ReplyDelete
  4. Mike, will you be able to sleep tonight, or will you be like a little kid waiting up for Santa? =)

    ReplyDelete
  5. Indeed. LOL.

    You know Trump was my dream opponent.

    But it's almost an embarrassment of riches. I feel like I'm a kid in the world's biggest candy store where try as I might, there is still so much to unwrap yet.

    That's oppo stuff on Trump for you.

    LOL.

    I am also of course totally stoked about Hillary tomorrow. I love the way that reporter got under Bernie's skin today by suggesting he's sexist for not acknowledging what Hillary has accomplished.

    http://talkingpointsmemo.com/livewire/bernie-sanders-clinton-sexist-california

    Truly it's all kind of a dream walking.

    LOL

    ReplyDelete