Elections Are Also About Issues, by Robert Gore

Posted by straightlinelogic 8 years, 1 month ago to Politics
4 comments | Share | Flag

Trump can be an offensive, loudmouth blowhard, but he is not stupid. Much of the wailing about the candidates’ deficiencies and the “circus” election casts offensive, loudmouth, and blowhard as equivalent to incompetent and criminal. Whom does such equivalence benefit? Trump’s policies and personality offer Americans an opportunity to challenge the status quo. Many Trump supporters are animated by the middle-finger desire, but Trump would have been long forgotten political roadkill if he didn’t offer a clear-cut departure from the “way things are” and the powers that be.

This is an excerpt. For the full article, please click the above link.
SOURCE URL: https://straightlinelogic.com/2016/11/04/elections-are-about-issues-by-robert-gore/


Add Comment

FORMATTING HELP

All Comments Hide marked as read Mark all as read

  • Posted by Zenphamy 8 years, 1 month ago
    All true and well said, as usual Robert. But no elected political or appointed position will ever be able to touch the invisible gov't, deep state, bureaucracy, whatever one wishes to call it. Until Congress is brought back to a representative/citizen ratio that places each one within the reasonable 'reach' of the individual citizen, and begins doing it's work of replacing regulations and department policy manuals with clearly understandable laws---it might be fun to watch the throes of whoever in the elected class falls out of favor, but we should all recognize that will result in little if any real effect.

    We need to fear. My sons are going to reach middle age in perilous times.
    Reply | Mark as read | Best of... | Permalink  
    • Posted by 8 years, 1 month ago
      I agree. Until there is either a collapse or a huge change in public sentiment, one that demands a much smaller government, there will be some sort of deep state pulling the levers. Electing Trump may be a tiny first step, but the journey itself is at least a thousand miles, and the desired destination may well not be reached, if it ever is, until long after we're all pushing up daisies.
      Reply | Mark as read | Parent | Best of... | Permalink  
  • -2
    Posted by CircuitGuy 8 years, 1 month ago
    Some of the claims.
    The Fed Reserve would pursue tighter policy to torpedo a Trump presidency - This rings potentially true to me. In Greenspan's book, he said protectionism would be as harmful to the economy as a massive war. If the stakes are that high and they have to tighten eventually anyway, I could see the political calculations influencing the committee's judgment.

    "Fix is in" / "Impending collapse" stuff - I reject all this. I think you do too. It may have gone over my head why this was in there.

    Opposition to kleptocracy (or anything IMHO) can always be perverted into a supposed clarion call for more gov't. - This is so true.

    Edifices poised to fall in the next four years - If this is a dramatic way of saying the economic cycle swings both ways and the president gets blamed for the ups and downs, I wholeheartedly agree.

    Clinton more hawkish than Trump - I am not at all convinced of this claim.

    Adversarial attitude with Russia is counter-productive. - I do not know, but I am not sure. I tend to agree. I am not confident Clinton would be more adversarial than Trump.

    FBI investigation of Clinton's IT issues - I think this is a complete nothing-burger. People who wish Clinton had a scandal have nothing else to work with, so they go to this.

    All the stuff about Trump having fewer political scandals and being less beholden to Washington power structure - I think that's true, but it's because Trump was making TV shows while Clinton was a senator and Secretary of State. Trump's scandals are silly things like having his private conversation recorded or things he did while running beauty pageants.

    The mention of PPACA: The problem with ACA is less its structure and more that people want a way to arrange their coins creatively so they have more money. That problem will persist. It's almost comical how ACA critics say they like the fact that it's easier for people with medical conditions to switch jobs, start businesses, and get the care they need. The part they're opposed to, though, is the extra cost. They'd repeal the extra cost, but leave the new healthcare services people are receiving in place. PPACA supporters sold it using the same something-for-nothing logic.

    In that one document someone posted, bracketed by crap about how he'd keep illegal immigrants from somehow getting healthcare dollars, Trump mention making it required to provide pricing for a contract for medical service to be enforceable. That's the real silver bullet. Clinton hasn't even mentioned it. I have no faith in Trump to execute on that point.

    Open borders / Muslim tide - Get used to it. It's an indirect result of technology that's not going away. People with different ideas and backgrounds all collaborating on Slack, emailing software, firmware, and 3D models, wiring money, and overnighting parts around the world is just the world we live in. It creating massive wealth.

    "a clear-cut departure from the “way things are” and the powers that be" - Literally a candidate of desperation. It seems like you're saying gov't being involved directly in over a a third of GDP is horrible. Clinton can't even talk about it. Instead she talks about gov't getting more involved, with things like gov't paying for college. So you figure even if Trump is a clown, he's more likely to blow up the system of gov't involvement in everything, while Clinton is likely to maintain the status quo. I get the logical but don't agree at all. Trump stirs up whatever people a desperate about and give them hope that somehow he's crazy enough to do what it takes to make their particular fears go away. I do not think he has the ability or intention to do that.
    Reply | Mark as read | Best of... | Permalink  

FORMATTING HELP

  • Comment hidden. Undo