Debate Now Will some of you "Trumpeteers" please tell me.....

[320 Years of History]

Would some of you Trump supporters please directly answer this question:

• What is it about Mr. Trump that you see or believe that allows you to discount and/or overlook all the stuff -- the misrepresentations of fact, all the half-truths, all the insulting rhetoric, all the inconsistencies in his remarks, all the high level (basic) facts he just doesn't know -- to the extent that you honestly believe his is of the right intellect and comportment that he will be a good President and that his Presidency won't be a colossal four year wast of time?

I know you "Trumpeteers" see the same inconsistencies and issues everyone else does, so don't go trying to tell me that they don't exist and aren't real. Also, do not reply in a comparative sense; this is not about how bad or messed up anyone else is. I want to know what about Mr. Trump merits, in your mind, his having earned your vote in spite of all the "stuff" we know thus far.

I'm asking the question you see above because I do not understand how "Trumpeteers" can, at this point, still throw their support behind Mr. Trump. I would like to know. It's that simple.

P.S.
"Trumpeteer" is my term for supporters of Donald Trump. I mean it only as a label of identity. No positive or negative intent accompanies the term.

Posting/Discussion Rules:

1. You cannot make comparisons with other candidates. Your answer must be in terms of Mr. Trump's strengths that you see as more important than all the weaknesses that have been reported about him.
2. If you write of the three following phrases in connection with an idea you share, or nothing similar to those phrases, your statements will be interpreted as attestations of verifiable fact.
   • "I believe..." or "I feel...", what follows either of these phrases (or is contextually linked with them) will be interpreted as your own belief and or emotionally driven stance, and that on which the belief is based need not be true in fact, but you at least believe it is true.
   • "I think...", what follows this phrase (or is contextually linked with it) will be interpreted as your reasoned/logical view based on some sort of evidence.
3. You may not refute or offer rebuttals to other members' statements of their personal beliefs, but you may ask a member why they believe as they do, provided you do not assail, rebut or refute the merit of their belief; you will accept that one truly believes that which one says one believes. Only statements that (1) articulate a reasoned view or that (2) are presented as attestations of verifiable fact may be refuted, assailed or counter-argued.

 

[S.J.]

If the term "Trumpeteer" isn't intended to be negative, why not call them Trump supporters? Wouldn't that be a better way of setting the tone for a civil debate? Seems as though the thread starts out as antagonistic.

 

[Bleipriester]

When talking about Trump like that, don´t forget that he successfully runs a big company.
Also, in 2008, a Nusra-Monkey came to light but nobody asked any questions.

 

[320 Years of History]

When talking about Trump like that, don´t forget that he successfully runs a big company.
Also, in 2008, a Nusra-Monkey came to light but nobody asked any questions.

??? I'm sorry. I don't know what a Nusra-Monkey is.

 

[TNHarley]

I doubt your "intent"..
Trump is anti-establishment, pro fair-trade, pro AMERICAN. People are tired of being neglected and overlooked. People want THEIR SERVANTS to serve THEM; not some foreign or special interest. That's why so many overlook his lunacy.
Tell me this : why is his lunacy any worse than what we have had for decades?

 

[Bleipriester]

When talking about Trump like that, don´t forget that he successfully runs a big company.
Also, in 2008, a Nusra-Monkey came to light but nobody asked any questions.

??? I'm sorry. I don't know what a Nusra-Monkey is.

8 years of the Nusra-Monkey and you still have no idea?

 

[320 Years of History]

When talking about Trump like that, don´t forget that he successfully runs a big company.
Also, in 2008, a Nusra-Monkey came to light but nobody asked any questions.

??? I'm sorry. I don't know what a Nusra-Monkey is.

8 years of the Nusra-Monkey and you still have no idea?

Did I stutter?

 

[Stephanie]

You do know there is OTHER candidates in this race right? You do know there are two old white fogies running for the Democrat party, RIGHT? YouR Trump obsession is becoming a bore already. K

 

[320 Years of History]

You do know there is OTHER candidates in this race right? You do know there are two old white fogies running for the Democrat party, RIGHT? YouR Trump obsession is becoming a bore already. K

I do know those things, but knowing them doesn't aid me in discerning the answer to the question I asked.

So far, out of a bit fewer than 200 people who've looked at the question/thread, only one, TNHarley, has actually given a direct answer to the OP question. So while I have one Trumpeteer's answer to the question, and I accept that as his answer, I still don't know anything other than his answer. Do other Trumpeteers have different reasons? I have no idea. How could I?

Note:
I know TNHarley must be a Trumpeteer because he answered the question. Being a Trump supporter (Trumpeteer) was part of the requirement for answering the question. Perhaps he's the only Trumpeteer here. Perhaps he's the only Trumpeteer who's seen the thread? I don't know. The other folks who've posted in the thread haven't indicated whether they are or are not Trumpeteers.

 

[320 Years of History]

I doubt your "intent"..
Trump is anti-establishment, pro fair-trade, pro AMERICAN. People are tired of being neglected and overlooked. People want THEIR SERVANTS to serve THEM; not some foreign or special interest. That's why so many overlook his lunacy.
Tell me this : why is his lunacy any worse than what we have had for decades?

Red:
I don't know why you doubt my intent, but I suspect it's because you think I'm a liar for that's the only thing that makes sense for me to think. If you volunteer something about your own motivations, I am in no position to say it's so or not so. I just have to accept that it is so because you said so. It'd be a statement made by you, about you/your intent; I don't know you, so why should I not believe you?

FWIW, if the man's name were "Donald Drum," I'd call his supporters "Drummers." "Trumpeteer" just sounds better than "trumpeter," "trumpists" and the other terms I considered, and the "eer" suffix reminds me of and is grammatically consistent with "musketeer."

I don't know what's hard to fathom or strange to conceive about how I came up with the term "Trumpeteer." Surely you see the correlation between Trump and trumpet, and surely you understand how a trumpet is similar to a bugle, and you no doubt understand what bugles were often used for. Thus, Trumpeteer.


Blue:
TY for directly answering the question I asked.

 

[TNHarley]

I doubt your "intent"..
Trump is anti-establishment, pro fair-trade, pro AMERICAN. People are tired of being neglected and overlooked. People want THEIR SERVANTS to serve THEM; not some foreign or special interest. That's why so many overlook his lunacy.
Tell me this : why is his lunacy any worse than what we have had for decades?

Red:
I don't know why you doubt my intent, but I suspect it's because you think I'm a liar for that's the only thing that makes sense for me to think. If you volunteer something about your own motivations, I am in no position to say it's so or not so. I just have to accept that it is so because you said so. It'd be a statement made by you, about you/your intent; I don't know you, so why should I not believe you?

FWIW, if the man's name were "Donald Drum," I'd call his supporters "Drummers." It just sounds better than "trumpeter," "trumpists" and the other terms I considered, and the "eer" suffix reminds me of and is grammatically consistent with "musketeer."

I don't know what's hard to fathom or strange to conceive about how I came up with the term "Trumpeteer." Surely you see the correlation between Trump and trumpet, and surely you understand how a trumpet is similar to a bugle, and you no doubt understand what bugles were often used for. Thus, Trumpeteer.


Blue:
TY for directly answering the question I asked.

LMAO fair enough

 

[candycorn]

I doubt your "intent"..
Trump is anti-establishment, pro fair-trade, pro AMERICAN. People are tired of being neglected and overlooked. People want THEIR SERVANTS to serve THEM; not some foreign or special interest. That's why so many overlook his lunacy.
Tell me this : why is his lunacy any worse than what we have had for decades?

JFK Says we will go to the moon and return a man safely. We do it in 8 years
Gernations oppose communism and the wall finally falls
Obama says he wants to install Obamacare and does so.
Bush SR. says "This will not stand" and in about 120 days, no more Iraq in Kuwait.

Presidential contenders have been making pledges for as long as there have been campaigns. They are almost always about improvement or expansion or righting a wrong; Mr. Trump's is to ban Muslims, kick out illegal immigrants, and build a wall.

The lunacy is Mr. Trump's...other responsible leaders have sought to embetter the nation, not fracture it along color or religious lines.

Just for starters...

 

[peach174]

I doubt your "intent"..
Trump is anti-establishment, pro fair-trade, pro AMERICAN. People are tired of being neglected and overlooked. People want THEIR SERVANTS to serve THEM; not some foreign or special interest. That's why so many overlook his lunacy.
Tell me this : why is his lunacy any worse than what we have had for decades?

JFK Says we will go to the moon and return a man safely. We do it in 8 years
Gernations oppose communism and the wall finally falls
Obama says he wants to install Obamacare and does so.
Bush SR. says "This will not stand" and in about 120 days, no more Iraq in Kuwait.

Presidential contenders have been making pledges for as long as there have been campaigns. They are almost always about improvement or expansion or righting a wrong; Mr. Trump's is to ban Muslims, kick out illegal immigrants, and build a wall.

The lunacy is Mr. Trump's...other responsible leaders have sought to embetter the nation, not fracture it along color or religious lines.

Just for starters...

President Obama already did that right after he got elected in2008 and has continued to do so, way before Trump announced his running.

 

[peach174]

I doubt your "intent"..
Trump is anti-establishment, pro fair-trade, pro AMERICAN. People are tired of being neglected and overlooked. People want THEIR SERVANTS to serve THEM; not some foreign or special interest. That's why so many overlook his lunacy.
Tell me this : why is his lunacy any worse than what we have had for decades?

JFK Says we will go to the moon and return a man safely. We do it in 8 years
Gernations oppose communism and the wall finally falls
Obama says he wants to install Obamacare and does so.
Bush SR. says "This will not stand" and in about 120 days, no more Iraq in Kuwait.

Presidential contenders have been making pledges for as long as there have been campaigns. They are almost always about improvement or expansion or righting a wrong; Mr. Trump's is to ban Muslims, kick out illegal immigrants, and build a wall.

The lunacy is Mr. Trump's...other responsible leaders have sought to embetter the nation, not fracture it along color or religious lines.

Just for starters...

Depends on how you look at things.
To the right banning Muslims immigrants until we get complete information about everything and then making decisions about letting them in, enforcing illegal immigration laws already on the books and building the rest of the wall in areas that are already working is improving things and making the nation better to them.
To the left that's lunacy.

 

[candycorn]

I doubt your "intent"..
Trump is anti-establishment, pro fair-trade, pro AMERICAN. People are tired of being neglected and overlooked. People want THEIR SERVANTS to serve THEM; not some foreign or special interest. That's why so many overlook his lunacy.
Tell me this : why is his lunacy any worse than what we have had for decades?

JFK Says we will go to the moon and return a man safely. We do it in 8 years
Gernations oppose communism and the wall finally falls
Obama says he wants to install Obamacare and does so.
Bush SR. says "This will not stand" and in about 120 days, no more Iraq in Kuwait.

Presidential contenders have been making pledges for as long as there have been campaigns. They are almost always about improvement or expansion or righting a wrong; Mr. Trump's is to ban Muslims, kick out illegal immigrants, and build a wall.

The lunacy is Mr. Trump's...other responsible leaders have sought to embetter the nation, not fracture it along color or religious lines.

Just for starters...

President Obama already did that right after he got elected in2008 and has continued to do so, way before Trump announced his running.

Examples please

 

[peach174]

I doubt your "intent"..
Trump is anti-establishment, pro fair-trade, pro AMERICAN. People are tired of being neglected and overlooked. People want THEIR SERVANTS to serve THEM; not some foreign or special interest. That's why so many overlook his lunacy.
Tell me this : why is his lunacy any worse than what we have had for decades?

JFK Says we will go to the moon and return a man safely. We do it in 8 years
Gernations oppose communism and the wall finally falls
Obama says he wants to install Obamacare and does so.
Bush SR. says "This will not stand" and in about 120 days, no more Iraq in Kuwait.

Presidential contenders have been making pledges for as long as there have been campaigns. They are almost always about improvement or expansion or righting a wrong; Mr. Trump's is to ban Muslims, kick out illegal immigrants, and build a wall.

The lunacy is Mr. Trump's...other responsible leaders have sought to embetter the nation, not fracture it along color or religious lines.

Just for starters...

President Obama already did that right after he got elected in2008 and has continued to do so, way before Trump announced his running.

Examples please

There has been plenty of examples over the last 7 years and I am not going to continue putting up the same examples over and over again like the rest of us have done and the left just ignores it or downright vilifies it.
The people are really getting tired of this.

 

[candycorn]

I doubt your "intent"..
Trump is anti-establishment, pro fair-trade, pro AMERICAN. People are tired of being neglected and overlooked. People want THEIR SERVANTS to serve THEM; not some foreign or special interest. That's why so many overlook his lunacy.
Tell me this : why is his lunacy any worse than what we have had for decades?

JFK Says we will go to the moon and return a man safely. We do it in 8 years
Gernations oppose communism and the wall finally falls
Obama says he wants to install Obamacare and does so.
Bush SR. says "This will not stand" and in about 120 days, no more Iraq in Kuwait.

Presidential contenders have been making pledges for as long as there have been campaigns. They are almost always about improvement or expansion or righting a wrong; Mr. Trump's is to ban Muslims, kick out illegal immigrants, and build a wall.

The lunacy is Mr. Trump's...other responsible leaders have sought to embetter the nation, not fracture it along color or religious lines.

Just for starters...

President Obama already did that right after he got elected in2008 and has continued to do so, way before Trump announced his running.

Examples please

There has been plenty of examples over the last 7 years and I am not going to continue putting up the same examples over and over again like the rest of us have done and the left just ignores it or downright vilifies it.
The people are really getting tired of this.

Oh well

 

[320 Years of History]

Okay....so seeing as not one "Trumpeteer" has bothered in the span of a week to so much as attempt to answer the thread question, what follows is what I believe is the reason "Trumpeteers" seem not to care whether anything Trump says is factually accurate.

All of what follows is my own personal belief on the matter based on what I have synthesized over the past week from reading the following:

• The “False Consensus Effect”: An Egocentric Bias in Social Perception and Attribution Processes
  
• What’s Not to Like? Preference Asymmetry in the False Consensus Effect
  
• How social influence can undermine the wisdom of crowd effect
  
• Who's with Me? False Consensus, Brokerage, and Ethical Decision Making in Organizations
  
• Running Ahead: Who's With Me?
• Fandom as Pathology: “Us” vs “Them”
• Celebrity Status

The fact of the matter is that people perceive themselves as having been slighted in some way, shape or form -- regardless of whether they in fact have been -- will believe whatever they hear or see that (1) makes them feel better, and (2) that validates their perceptions. Upon receiving validation from someone whom they view as a role model, or whom they at least want to be like, such people, in the back of their minds, think "See. I was right."

Donald Trump, with his wealth and fame, is that role model who's provided validation to the millions of "common" people who support him. He's vulgar; so are they. He's willing to say anything that crosses his mind without bothering to know whether it's true or not; so are they. He's convinced of his universal infallibility; so are they. When challenged or rebuked by people who can tell are, on the topic at hand, far better informed than he, Trump responds with insults, irrelevant points, and/or non-sequitur comments; so do they. Trump is a wealthy man who has a "trophy" wife; his supporters want one or the other of those things too.

Giving stature to those things in the course of performing one's critical analysis and development of national policy sounds like the approach of a fool because that's what it is. But Trump isn't a fool. He is is crafty enough to realize that there are a lot of folks who are fools -- How could he not? He knows what the viewership is of his reality shows. -- and he's despicable enough to use that as a means to obtaining power and support. What Trump has done is identify the emotional and intellectual vulnerabilities of a huge segment of the American populace and crafted a plan that uses those vulnerabilities to get their blind and unwavering support.

How is it individuals allow that to happen to themselves and not even recognize that it is? Well, think back to any time you've said (more or less), "I know it doesn't make any sense, but it's what I'm going to do anyway." Now imagine if that which one supposed made no sense but one did/believed anyway later is found to be exactly what someone who's "everything one wants to be but isn't" says/does the same thing and says s/he knows why you aren't him/her and that s/he is going to fix the things that kept you from being more like him/her.

Well, at that point, it really doesn't matter whether s/he has a viable plan for making that happen. It doesn't matter, even having a plan, whether the plan is implementable or has any plausible chance of succeeding, whether the plan will stand up to rigorous scrutiny. All that matters is that someone "important" has validated one; therefore there's no need to actually examine the substance of what they say. They apparently agree with "you," and "you" agree with them. That makes both of them right in their minds, and that's good enough.

It's true that Trump discusses issues that voters care about. It's true that he discusses those issues in ways the other candidates do not. Both those things are wonderful, but difference for its own sake isn't wonderful; it's wasteful. More important than that, however, if one is going address anything that people truly care about, the first requirement is that what one says about it, far more often than not, be factually true.

 

[candycorn]

It's true that Trump discusses issues that voters care about. It's true that he discusses those issues in ways the other candidates do not. Both those things are wonderful, but difference for its own sake isn't wonderful; it's wasteful. More important than that, however, if one is going address anything that people truly care about, the first requirement is that what one says about it, far more often than not, be factually true.

Good post.

The inability of a Trump supporter to articulate why they support this small fraction of a man is one of the main reasons I’m so confident in a Clinton victory in November (provided she doesn’t step in it along the way and when it comes to that, Clinton has some pretty big feet).

I like what you wrote. I’m highlighting the last paragraph because I disagree with it.

Trump does not discuss issues that voters care about in any real way.

Trade is my favorite. Betty Sue and Bobby Joe at a Trump rally hear “fair trade” and go nuts. Trade affects exports If we had the best trade deals in the universe, it would embolden one segment of the economy; heavy industry. You may get some white collar along with that but HI will be the only real out right winner. If you’re a nurse, architect, horticulturist, rancher, waitress, or delivery guy/gal, you will see very little in terms of enhancement. While HI is important, there is no guarantee that IBM, International Harvester, or Cummins will build those units Stateside or even have the capacity to fulfill new orders. Additionally, if Company X in Sri Lanka is now competing with IBM, IH, or Cummins; do you think they will just shrug and accept it? They will cut their prices to compete. But it sure does sound good that we’re going to “stick it” to someone.

Meanwhile due to another issue that voters care little about but rednecks have been whipped up into a frenzy over; immigration….let’s assume the ICE rounds up 8 million people who are here illegally. As most of you know and as stats confirm, the overwhelming majority of illegal aliens are just here to earn a buck and have no brushes with the law outside of the original illegality. So as a nurse, that means fewer patients, architects design fewer houses, ranchers sell less products, and waitresses have fewer customers. This directly affects the pocketbooks of workers. Also if a city is missing 40-50 thousand consumers (not out of the realm of possibility in a place like Phoenix, LA, Miami, etc…) sales taxes are going to take a hit thus reducing city services or driving the tax rate upwards. But it sure does sound good that we’re going to “stick it” to someone.

And that is my point. Trump supplies nothing. And he doesn’t discuss what voters want to hear. Trump entertains people and people respond. Certainly not a novel concept. But then again PT Barnum never ran for President

 

[320 Years of History]

It's true that Trump discusses issues that voters care about. It's true that he discusses those issues in ways the other candidates do not. Both those things are wonderful, but difference for its own sake isn't wonderful; it's wasteful. More important than that, however, if one is going address anything that people truly care about, the first requirement is that what one says about it, far more often than not, be factually true.

Good post.

...

I like what you wrote. I’m highlighting the last paragraph because I disagree with it.

Trump does not discuss issues that voters care about in any real way....And he doesn’t discuss what voters want to hear.

...heavy industry....IBM...

...

Red:
Thank you and thank you for expressly saying so.

Blue:
Trump's remarks most of the time lack substance as well as contextual and literal accuracy --> Agree.

"What voters want to hear" --> He doesn't say what they need to hear either. I happen to think Trump does indeed tell people what they want to hear. Unfortunately, what they want to hear and what they need to hear aren't remotely similar.

IMO, a "straight talker" is not one who says anything they feel like saying. Rather a "straight talker" is one who says what is true not only when the truth is easy to tell, but also when it is hard to tell and people don't really like or want to hear it.

Pink:
Not that it's central to the points you were making, for it's definitely not, but FWIW, IBM is not the manufacturing industry giant it used to be. They still make mainframe computers (no PCs, laptops or servers) and ~50% of IBM revenue comes from them. The other half of their business comes from software and management consulting.

IBM has moved away from manufacturing because, among other things, its executive team recognizes that for as big and powerful as IBM is, and it is, its fortunes are far better boosted by developing and implementing, at the highest levels business strategies that are complimented by the principles of supply and demand, not by trying to buck them.

Knowing that it is a U.S. company and that it wants to remain so, IBM did exactly what each and every one of us must do: recognize that would-be U.S. producers' ability to maintain a comparative advantage in the manufacture of personal computing devices and servers ranges from unlikely to impossible absent tariffs and other protectionist measures. Seeing the "writing on the wall," IBM shifted away from manufacturing where it lacked a comparative advantage and into service and software development where it can and does have viably profit generating comparative advantages. IBM did not remain wedded to manufacturing hardware, but it did remain wedded to being a profitable company for its owners, which as a company is exactly what it's supposed to do.

American citizens should perform the exact same analysis, albeit on a far smaller scale. Like IBM, individuals should refrain from harboring nostalgic dreams of decades long gone and face the current and future reality. That reality means they must, like, IBM, transform themselves into the kinds of worker that is in demand in the U.S., that is if they want to work in the U.S. and earn a good salary.

That message, of course, is not what folks want to hear. It means they must change; it means they must learn how to be something they haven't been before.

So when it comes to the messages political candidates deliver re: jobs, the economy and trade, they need to tell people the truth: the days of big manufacturing in the U.S. have been waning for quite some time now and if you didn't notice, you had best do so soon. Politicians need to tell people how the government is going to help them make the transition to being able to perform work that U.S. businesses can use to provide, in the global marketplace, those things at which the U.S. has a competitive advantage, not build up their hopes that we can return to being the hub of global manufacturing because as long as U.S. factory workers earn triple or more what their foreign counterparts do, that's just not going to happen.

Politicians need to tell Americans what the reality is, and the reality is that factory laborers must make a choice. The U.S. can become a major manufacturing powerhouse as it was in the 20th century, but to do so, it's also got to reduce the cost of manufacturing labor. After making that understood, the question is clear:

• Would you prefer we be major manufacturers who do so at globally competitive wages?
  
  Or
  
  
• Would you prefer to learn how to do something else and earn a higher salary?

After making it clear those are the two main options, the last thing politicians need to tell people is that of those two choices the government can rather easily and effectively make the second one happen, whereas to make the first one happen the government must regulate and stipulate what wages be. And quite frankly, that's long been something the government doesn't like to do beyond identifying a minimum price of labor, and it's certainly something few folks want the government to do.