Why Trump?

Well Trump has been elected President of the United States. I was marginally surprised, but not flabbergasted. I always felt this election was about an outsider and when Bernie Sanders was relegated by the Democrats, that really took their steam away. What I'm really surprised at is the reaction of the media. There's stories in schools about how to explain to kids that Trump got elected. Apparently he comes across as a bully and uses bad language and acts crudely towards women.

Yes folks, this is what is terrible to explain to kids. Not American presidents torturing, going to war, lying, bailing out banks, corruption. Apparently all that is run of the mill in politics and children should be fine with accepting that (sarcasm).

I'll just go through the points of why I think Trump got elected.


 I don't think there's much to add here. America and the West has seen their working class lose jobs and their standard of living. Part of this is due to free trade. Hilary and other progressives can only speak good of free trade. Hey I'm Canadian and that's all we hear as well from our progressives. The Democrats had Bernie Sanders who was more pro labor, but he wasn't running. Trump was the only candidate speaking to the people in struggling economic communities; especially in the so-called Rust Belt. If he's the only game in town, well that's what people are going to vote for.

Illegal Immigration

Partly related to jobs and trade is immigration. Illegal immigrants impact labor and are perceived to keep wages low. There's also a fear of crime and other areas. Trump spoke to people's real concerns here without a politically correct filter. Some of this made me uneasy, but again we have to look at what the opponent was saying... which was basically nothing to address people's concerns. Immigration; even illegal immigration is thought of as some kind of natural good that cannot be questioned by some progressives. So if you're not willing to even address people's concerns, well they're going to go with the one who is.


I'd put this in a similar box as the illegal immigration question. Much of what Trump said made me uneasy. Despite my non-religious nature, from the outside I am Muslim and would hate to be in that kind of environment. Yet again, people do have real concerns that no one was addressing. Everything from terrorism to crime to culture. As Trump would say progressives like Clinton won't even mention the term Islam or Muslim with anything bad. This frustrates people.

It's sad again that there is no reasonable candidate willing to address issues without appearing or being racist. It's sad that regular progressives just don't want to deal with it. So people are either left to choose between racist policies they think will protect them or not dealing with the issue.

People do see what is happening in the world and progressives haven't done a good job of addressing migrants and Muslims in places like Europe. To take a classic example of the pathetic non-addressing job progressives have done:

This story just exemplifies how people see progressives dealing with Muslim and migrants. Here we have a 10 year old boy being raped by a migrant. There is no question it happened. The man's excuse is he hadn't had sex for months and couldn't control himself. The Austrian supreme court said the lower court hadn't done enough to show the man didn't get the boy's permission. Yeah because you know a 10 year old boy can consent... What is the age of consent is Austria? It's not 10 years old.

You really can't make this up. This is the sickness of progressives and how they refuse to address the issues if it has to deal with Muslims or migrants. 

There's several other poorly handled cases in Europe as well.
Again children and women being raped and abused on mass and authorities are scared of being racist if they pursue it.
Even on the lesser level, countless other issues go unaddressed. Forced marriages, authoritarian families, honor killings/beatings/isolation, restriction of children freedoms, corporal punishment, anti-western views, forming ghettos...

It's sad, but this is what is presented to people.
Either choose
  1. Progressive ideology that will let children be raped because they don't want to appear 'racist'
  2. Choose a Xenophobic hate filled approach
 I hate that choice and it sickens me, but I guess if I was an American, I could see why they would choose that path. Yes, America isn't Europe, but people are aware and do see the world in trends. When they see Clinton, they see the path towards Europe.

Misogyny and Racism

A big part of what Trump's opponents held over him was his misogynistic and racist speak. It's simply unacceptable. Yet again, you have to weigh it. Trump talking about grabbing women by their pussy isn't a national policy. Bill Clinton had affairs and all kinds of other politicians have been in weird sexual scandals. People weigh that against policy and they could generally ignore Trump's flaws in these areas.

It's sad just how much the media think identity politics matters. Like how could you vote for Trump if you're Black, Latino, or a women? Well a lot of women did. About 8% of black votes did. I think about 25% of Latino voters did. Not every Latino thinks open borders is the single most important issue. Not every women thinks political correctness is the single most important issue.

I think there's also a rift between what classifies as racism or misogyny.
Take this from the Daily Show
“These extreme nations, they don’t treat women with respect,” said a man with a shirt with “Hillary sucks, but not like Monica” written on the front and “Trump that bitch!” on the back.
Now, is that t-shirt in good taste? Nope. But is it hatred of women? He clearly thinks poorly of Hilary and makes a joke about Monica Lewinsky and uses the word Bitch. I think many people think that is an attack against Clinton, and not a general hatred of women.

The media insults all people by assuming people should vote for their assigned identity, ignoring all the real impactful issues on their lives including jobs, healthcare, infrastructure, security...


I don't think anyone thinks Hilary is a very likeable candidate. She just comes across as a fake politician. Hey, some might see all politicians are fake. That might be true, but Hilary doesn't do it very well. I remember seeing a documentary about Hilary on the Passionate Eye.

What's truly tragic is early Hilary would have probably been someone I would have liked. She came across almost as a hippie. Yet as it show, she just became part of the political machine. First being part of Bill Clinton's career and then just part of the machine. She changed everything about herself from her last name to her appearance.

As a member of the establishment, she was a poor choice in an election where outsiders held some sway. Those rust belt states with working class votes that cost her the election would have probably voted for Bernie. Instead, they didn't have that choice and went with Trump.

Basis of Democracy

I think this is something interesting. It is perhaps so basic, and yet I think progressives might need to learn this lesson. Everyone speaks about how they are more educated or more qualified to be president.

Yet, that is not the starting point for getting a vote.

The starting point for getting someone's vote is
To be on their side
To represent their interests

That is something progressives have forgotten for some reason. If you're a working class private sector worker, Hilary Clinton was not on your side. She spoke of trade deals and the establishment. The same establishment that has seen you decimated for the past 20 years.

No matter how educated or qualified someone is for a position, if they're not on your side, they're just really qualified to screw you over. It is easy to see why Trump's message of 'Put America First' and 'Make America Great Again' resonated with huge numbers of people.


Who knows what Trump will do in office. All we can say is he campaigned on certain things to get him elected. Will he actually do a lot of what he said? Who knows? To me, Trump almost seems like someone who fights things one battle at a time. First get elected. Then decide policy. The so called art-of-the-deal. Is he the right person to be making deals in government? It's all just to be seen. I'm, not one to buy into the hysteria around having him with the nuclear codes or anything like that.


Popular posts from this blog

What does it mean to live in a free society?

Post Scarcity Economy

The Niqab is cultural?