09-21-2016, 06:33 PM
Yo, Mr. Mike M.
Short answer, I tried to define the term "right-wing populism". I indeed did it with some bias I was not secretive about.
But the points I made really weren't intended to pick up an argument, but rather to answer where I see the similarities between Trump and Europe's right-wing partys. You basically just defend these points and arguing that these points are indeed legit. Which simply makes you fit my description. You're a supporter of right-wing populism allright. You tend to agree with them. And fair enough.
But I indeed did not plan to get into an argument with a Trump supporter about Trump. Because that simply gets a bit over my head. What would I know about stuff. All I know is what's on the internet, you know.
Still, long answer:
Look, that's just what I would call "being anti-immigrant". Maybe the term "strict immigration policy" fits you better. - I tend to see things quite differently on that topic, but we can agree to disagree here. It's not that your voice isn't important.
It's just a typical right-wing position that you take here. No bias, just fact. That's all.
No. "Make it great again" is not just putting nation first. It's make it great "again" as if it had been under some kind of decline. Four years ago Romney couldn't think about anything bad to say about the US. Now it lost its greatness? (And it's Obama's and Hillary's fault?) This is something quite more nuanced.
It's not saying "our country is great", it's saying "only I can make this country great". (Which Trump actually says so directly, too.) There's a huge difference.
Btw. of course not all typical "right-wing populism" positions are exclusive for them.
See above. I definitely do not intend to defend Hillary.
Trumps reaction was heard about here, though, with some astonishment. Guess why. Hint, it's the "the only reason the killer was in America in the first place, was because we allowed his family to come here" part. Using it like that. Gun control, on the other hand, is a pretty harmless thing compared to banning all muslims from entering the country. That's of course just my take. You might be as well for that. That's just anti-immigration then. Again, just calling it what it is.
So... you're referring to islam as an inferior culture that is a threat to ours allright. Just my point.
Listen, I'm not so left-wing on that one, too. I didn't claim that all typical right-wing populist's points and opinions are completely rubbish and that I see everything completely different. (I get why you thought so, though. And I'm not actually agreeing with the take you presented, for there are so many moderate Muslims in both our countries who deserve much better than this judgment or connotation.)
I don't know about FBI statistics, I don't get into that one. I know that on the topic of immigration there are always a lot of numbers and statistics provided by both sides, and I mistrust the significance of all of them. That's just me though.
The rest, well. You couldn't deny that jobs go overseas, but ok it's a "fact".
His solutions aren't. There are no facts, just words and a lot of "I'm the greatest ever, I know what to do". It's not supposed to work based on facts. It's supposed to work based on the idea that Trump is successful and therefore some kind of genius on everything. But there is no "plan" to fight the loss of jobs. You probably would need to ask Kasich about the idea here.
It's the persona that says "trust me". And the emotion his supporters experience when hearing him say it. That's basically it. The rest is hot air up to irrational crazytalk. True story.
Trump himself said it, again. He is pretty blunt, I got to admit.
"You don't sell products, benefits or solutions - you sell feelings."
Again, I didn't say it shouldn't. Law and Order describes a certain policy that is a trademark of right-wing populism (I sound like a broken record).
Trump is "Law and Order", and that describes a certain stricter policy. There doesn't need to be disagreement, right? He just is.
Easily.
Blaming the biased "liberal" (or whatever) media comes to mind. Often just because they call him out on obvious BS (you know too there is some) like they are supposed to. Of all the similarities to Europes right-wingers, this is maybe the biggest one, and a very important one for their success. "Mistrust the media when they call us liars and agitators or say that we are factually wrong about anything. Mistrust all other politicians or experts or scientists, mistrust good taste, mistrust PC, mistrust everyone but us, we say it like it is." Big part of the construct.
No, I did not call him stupid and I didn't intend to. He most certainly isn't, I think he's a bit impaired by a psychological disorder called narcissism, but these can be highly functioning people. He isn't an intellectual, though.
His supporters aren't necessarily stupid. It's just that they are not as smart as they believe to be. They get the sense of "getting it", of "seeing it", Trump plants that persuasion. They accuse others of being blind to the things they can see. Of being influenced, biased, whatever. That's what makes them "anti-intellectual". The whole points are not even made for an intellectual discourse. Because again, you might just end up arguing about feelings, prefabricated opinions based on these feelings, even before the single first fact comes into play. They get merged into the belief system afterwards, after the system already is constructed. And therefore a debate with a right-wing supporter is always ending up in an "you don't get it - no you don't get it" sort of thing. Which is a reason why Trump gets away with so much - transforming false claims into feelings, that is, therefore making them indebateable. You might shake your head about that. But think about it just a minute, will you. You might find there's at least a bit to that.
Yeah, which ways?
He'll "get it figured out somehow"?
- That is virtually nothing. Take a hard look. There's nothing.
Not exclusively specific, but typical.
OK, you too have a strange love for Putin.
True, they both use it, but they use it - quite differently. You know that's true.
Yeah well, I wouldn't. See my remarks about "pluralism" I edited in in the previous post.
Short answer, I tried to define the term "right-wing populism". I indeed did it with some bias I was not secretive about.
But the points I made really weren't intended to pick up an argument, but rather to answer where I see the similarities between Trump and Europe's right-wing partys. You basically just defend these points and arguing that these points are indeed legit. Which simply makes you fit my description. You're a supporter of right-wing populism allright. You tend to agree with them. And fair enough.
But I indeed did not plan to get into an argument with a Trump supporter about Trump. Because that simply gets a bit over my head. What would I know about stuff. All I know is what's on the internet, you know.
Still, long answer:
(09-21-2016, 04:24 PM)Mike M (the other one) Wrote: - Being anti-immigrant (see: they're rapists and whatnot)
Protecting your country from criminals that come here illegally is not being anti-immigrant.
There's lots of problems with people that come here illegally. first they are not properly vaccinated, so that is a big health issue.
second, most are not educated, therefore will end up being a drain on the system, will need to work illegally, so under the table, pushing drugs etc type of jobs to support themselves.
Trump has stated many times, he has no problems with Immigrants as long as they come here thru the front door.
Look, that's just what I would call "being anti-immigrant". Maybe the term "strict immigration policy" fits you better. - I tend to see things quite differently on that topic, but we can agree to disagree here. It's not that your voice isn't important.
It's just a typical right-wing position that you take here. No bias, just fact. That's all.
(09-21-2016, 04:24 PM)Mike M (the other one) Wrote: - Being nationalistic (Make it great again!)
Uhm, that was previously one of Bill Clinton's lines back in 1992 when he ran for Presidency?
Anyways, this part is really stupid, anyone that is running for the head office puts their nation first. To do so otherwise is political suicide. I've never heard of anyone's slogan as "Let's eff this country up!"
No. "Make it great again" is not just putting nation first. It's make it great "again" as if it had been under some kind of decline. Four years ago Romney couldn't think about anything bad to say about the US. Now it lost its greatness? (And it's Obama's and Hillary's fault?) This is something quite more nuanced.
It's not saying "our country is great", it's saying "only I can make this country great". (Which Trump actually says so directly, too.) There's a huge difference.
Btw. of course not all typical "right-wing populism" positions are exclusive for them.
(09-21-2016, 04:24 PM)Mike M (the other one) Wrote: - Being opportunistic (see his reaction to Orlando)
Both sides pushed their own agenda's with this one. Gun Control vs Immigrant Control.
See above. I definitely do not intend to defend Hillary.
Trumps reaction was heard about here, though, with some astonishment. Guess why. Hint, it's the "the only reason the killer was in America in the first place, was because we allowed his family to come here" part. Using it like that. Gun control, on the other hand, is a pretty harmless thing compared to banning all muslims from entering the country. That's of course just my take. You might be as well for that. That's just anti-immigration then. Again, just calling it what it is.
(09-21-2016, 04:24 PM)Mike M (the other one) Wrote: - Referring to a core culture threatened by inferior cultures (e.g. being anti-Islamic)
It's not about being Anti-Islamic, it's about Islamic being anti-western.
Not sure where you are going with this one, Islam considers all other cultures to be inferior, so it's only natural that other cultures feel threatened when you see the heads of other people getting chopped off for no real reason, or women being stoned, or daughters being killed for being raped by their fathers/brothers etc to keep the Family Honor intact. Men own the women/children, LGBT's getting tossed off the highest roofs. The majority of their culture is the opposite of the Western Culture, yet we are not supposed to feel threatened by people that keep promising to kill us and send our culture backwards (we already put child labors laws up and still trying to make women equal to men)? And they are not just threats to our Western Nations, some have been carried out already.
So... you're referring to islam as an inferior culture that is a threat to ours allright. Just my point.
Listen, I'm not so left-wing on that one, too. I didn't claim that all typical right-wing populist's points and opinions are completely rubbish and that I see everything completely different. (I get why you thought so, though. And I'm not actually agreeing with the take you presented, for there are so many moderate Muslims in both our countries who deserve much better than this judgment or connotation.)
(09-21-2016, 04:24 PM)Mike M (the other one) Wrote: - Operating with people's fear (that's not just "my take", people's emotions are addressed, not their brains. Things he says are mainly fact-free. See what I said above.)
So it's our imagination that the FBI statistics back up what Trump said about Illegals? How about Terrorist Attacks on US Soil? How about lack of jobs, because they've moved overseas? Maybe if you provide some examples.
I don't know about FBI statistics, I don't get into that one. I know that on the topic of immigration there are always a lot of numbers and statistics provided by both sides, and I mistrust the significance of all of them. That's just me though.
The rest, well. You couldn't deny that jobs go overseas, but ok it's a "fact".
His solutions aren't. There are no facts, just words and a lot of "I'm the greatest ever, I know what to do". It's not supposed to work based on facts. It's supposed to work based on the idea that Trump is successful and therefore some kind of genius on everything. But there is no "plan" to fight the loss of jobs. You probably would need to ask Kasich about the idea here.
It's the persona that says "trust me". And the emotion his supporters experience when hearing him say it. That's basically it. The rest is hot air up to irrational crazytalk. True story.
Trump himself said it, again. He is pretty blunt, I got to admit.
"You don't sell products, benefits or solutions - you sell feelings."
(09-21-2016, 04:24 PM)Mike M (the other one) Wrote: - Emphasizing Law and Order (threats are everywhere, only I can keep the country safe)
Might have something here, but wasn't there just another Riot last night? How about this past weekend? Bombs in NYC? Stabbings in Minnesota? Now we do have Laws and Order, but not all laws are followed. Legal Citizen Safety should not be a Politicians concern?
Again, I didn't say it shouldn't. Law and Order describes a certain policy that is a trademark of right-wing populism (I sound like a broken record).
Trump is "Law and Order", and that describes a certain stricter policy. There doesn't need to be disagreement, right? He just is.
(09-21-2016, 04:24 PM)Mike M (the other one) Wrote: - Presenting themselves as anti-establishment, e.g. presenting them and their voters "victim" of the "establishment's opinion-making" when facing critizism
I'll give you half of this one. He is somewhat anti-establishment. He knows how the game works and has admitted to playing it when it suited him. Can you provide me some examples of the 2nd half of your comments?
Easily.
Blaming the biased "liberal" (or whatever) media comes to mind. Often just because they call him out on obvious BS (you know too there is some) like they are supposed to. Of all the similarities to Europes right-wingers, this is maybe the biggest one, and a very important one for their success. "Mistrust the media when they call us liars and agitators or say that we are factually wrong about anything. Mistrust all other politicians or experts or scientists, mistrust good taste, mistrust PC, mistrust everyone but us, we say it like it is." Big part of the construct.
(09-21-2016, 04:24 PM)Mike M (the other one) Wrote: - Being anti-intellectual
Are you referring to Trump being stupid? Or his followers or both?
Just because someone is Anti-Intellectual doesn't mean that they are incapable of making solid decisions. I would judge a leader more on their ability to Listen to all parties and find a middle ground. Some of the smartest people in the world have made some of the dumbest decisions. Why? Because they are incapable of listening to others.
No, I did not call him stupid and I didn't intend to. He most certainly isn't, I think he's a bit impaired by a psychological disorder called narcissism, but these can be highly functioning people. He isn't an intellectual, though.
His supporters aren't necessarily stupid. It's just that they are not as smart as they believe to be. They get the sense of "getting it", of "seeing it", Trump plants that persuasion. They accuse others of being blind to the things they can see. Of being influenced, biased, whatever. That's what makes them "anti-intellectual". The whole points are not even made for an intellectual discourse. Because again, you might just end up arguing about feelings, prefabricated opinions based on these feelings, even before the single first fact comes into play. They get merged into the belief system afterwards, after the system already is constructed. And therefore a debate with a right-wing supporter is always ending up in an "you don't get it - no you don't get it" sort of thing. Which is a reason why Trump gets away with so much - transforming false claims into feelings, that is, therefore making them indebateable. You might shake your head about that. But think about it just a minute, will you. You might find there's at least a bit to that.
(09-21-2016, 04:24 PM)Mike M (the other one) Wrote: - Offering wild, radical promises (See: Mexico paying for a giant wall)
Yea a little crazy sounding, but not out there. He'll get it figured out someway. He's already come up with a couple of ways to get it from them.
Yeah, which ways?
He'll "get it figured out somehow"?
- That is virtually nothing. Take a hard look. There's nothing.
(09-21-2016, 04:24 PM)Mike M (the other one) Wrote: - Using right-wing rhetorics. Like putting things out without any verification ("I don't know, I'm just hearing" and all that - here it's "I'm just asking questions")
zzzzzzzzzzzzz again not specific to the Right only.
Not exclusively specific, but typical.
(09-21-2016, 04:24 PM)Mike M (the other one) Wrote: - A strange love for Putin
I don't care much for him, but he does get Shit done. He also doesn't apologize nor insult his fellow country men by calling them deplorable or lazy.
OK, you too have a strange love for Putin.
(09-21-2016, 04:24 PM)Mike M (the other one) Wrote: - The use of social media
How can it be a Right thing when both sides are doing it.
True, they both use it, but they use it - quite differently. You know that's true.
(09-21-2016, 04:24 PM)Mike M (the other one) Wrote: - The dividing of society
I would say the media has caused this more so than Trump.
Yeah well, I wouldn't. See my remarks about "pluralism" I edited in in the previous post.
![[Image: 4CV0TeR.png]](https://i.imgur.com/4CV0TeR.png)
