The 2016 Presidential Election Trainwreck

[myboynoah]

I love the armchair psychology that is going on in the popular media about the Trump phenomenon: " there has got to be some explanation for this!! What they hell is even happening!?!"

The explanation is very simple: there is a segment of republicans who feel like they repeatedly and systemically aren't being heard, and so they are going nuclear with their votes.

You can only get patted on the head for your frustrations so many times before you decide to escalate your reaction to it. The "Authoritarian" explanation captures this sentiment in part, but like most simplistic explanations, fails to explain how Trump is capturing so much of the vote. You can use all the "well, he is only capturing the rural stupid people" anecdote to explain part of his support, not all of it. I think that there are a significant number of his supporters that realize he is a caricature and believe he wouldn't really do the crazy things he says, and because he is such a wild card, you can imagine him to be really anything you want him to be underneath the "facade."

In the end, if Trump is elected, it will be for similar reasons that Putin was elected in Russia, however Trump is most definitely no Putin.

I don't think they are all Republicans. I believe there is also a good portion of Trump's support that comes from working class independents and Dems.

[Donuthole]

I love the armchair psychology that is going on in the popular media about the Trump phenomenon: " there has got to be some explanation for this!! What they hell is even happening!?!"

The explanation is very simple: there is a segment of republicans who feel like they repeatedly and systemically aren't being heard, and so they are going nuclear with their votes.

You can only get patted on the head for your frustrations so many times before you decide to escalate your reaction to it. The "Authoritarian" explanation captures this sentiment in part, but like most simplistic explanations, fails to explain how Trump is capturing so much of the vote.

What if the explanation were that there were a couple of different types of authoritarians, and a convergence of social change and physical threats awakened all of them at once.That doesn't seem like a simplistic explanation at all.

[Goatnapper'96]

What if the explanation were that there were a couple of different types of authoritarians, and a convergence of social change and physical threats awakened all of them at once.That doesn't seem like a simplistic explanation at all.

I think it is the best explanation I have read yet. His support is clearly not limited to just one type of demographic. He is appealing to a broad swath of the American population.

[Omaha 680]

More grasping at straws for me:

The single most shocking number from Super Tuesday might have been this poll showing voter awareness about various aspects of Trump: Only 27 percent had heard about his reluctance to denounce David Duke and the KKK; 20 percent about Trump University and the fraud lawsuit; 13 percent about the failure of Trump Mortgage.

At some point, those numbers will all be at 90 percent because someone will spend a lot of money putting ads about them all over television in battleground states. The only question is whether it will be conservatives or Hillary Clinton who expose voters to this information. Either way, it suggests that Trump still has the potential for downward mobility if conservative donors are serious about stopping him.

http://www.weeklystandard.com/five-r...rticle/2001354

I don't know why rival campaigns weren't putting this stuff out there months ago.

[Donuthole]

I think it is the best explanation I have read yet. His support is clearly not limited to just one type of demographic. He is appealing to a broad swath of the American population.

FTR, it is not my explanation (to the extent you were attributing it to me). I was merely wanting to highlight the fact that wally clearly didn't read the Vox article linked above. Or maybe he read it but didn't understand it.

[Jeff Lebowski]

but what about my question about open primaries? There's got to be a reason?!

I see what you are saying and there is certainly a healthy portion of Trump's support that are mad as hell and aren't going to take it any more. But to paraphrase Karl Malone: What have Trump did that Cruz have not did? If there is a significant hyperconservative base in the party that is sick of not being heard, doesn't Cruz satisfy their criteria? Don't get me wrong I don't want either of them, but if it is as simple as being super conservative and being heard on things like gay marriage and immigration isn't Cruz the better choice? Or is it really just cathartic for these people to vote for the bully that says what they want to say when they are mad?

Read the link that YO provided. It provides a fairly compelling theory.

[wally]

FTR, it is not my explanation (to the extent you were attributing it to me). I was merely wanting to highlight the fact that wally clearly didn't read the Vox article linked above. Or maybe he read it but didn't understand it.

I will admit that I started skimming about a a quarter of the way in. Any article that likes to boil things down to single term like "authoritarianism", to explain things kind of comes off as essential oils to me: "it cures EVERYTHING!"

Seems like you enjoy insulting the intelligence of people you disagree with. You might just have more in common with "the Donald" than you think!!

[BlueK]

I love the armchair psychology that is going on in the popular media about the Trump phenomenon: " there has got to be some explanation for this!! What they hell is even happening!?!"

The explanation is very simple: there is a segment of republicans who feel like they repeatedly and systemically aren't being heard, and so they are going nuclear with their votes.

You can only get patted on the head for your frustrations so many times before you decide to escalate your reaction to it. The "Authoritarian" explanation captures this sentiment in part, but like most simplistic explanations, fails to explain how Trump is capturing so much of the vote. You can use all the "well, he is only capturing the rural stupid people" anecdote to explain part of his support, not all of it. I think that there are a significant number of his supporters that realize he is a caricature and believe he wouldn't really do the crazy things he says, and because he is such a wild card, you can imagine him to be really anything you want him to be underneath the "facade."

In the end, if Trump is elected, it will be for similar reasons that Putin was elected in Russia, however Trump is most definitely no Putin.

I have a problem with automatically without question assuming that Trump doesn't mean what he says or wouldn't try to do the crazy things he says. Whether he could actually do it is something else, but I don't really see a good enough reason to automatically write it off as stuff he doesn't really mean. Why isn't he a Putin? It it walks like a duck...

[wally]

I have a problem with automatically without question assuming that Trump doesn't mean what he says or wouldn't try to do the crazy things he says. Whether he could actually do it is something else, but I don't really see a good enough reason to automatically write it off as stuff he doesn't really mean. Why isn't he a Putin? It it walks like a Duck...

It would be nice if politicians in general were genuine wouldn't it?

[Donuthole]

Any article that likes to boil things down to single term like "authoritarianism", to explain things kind of comes off as essential oils to me: "it cures EVERYTHING!"

What if an article outlined authoritarianism generally and then showed and explained a bunch of data about how many people who are not authoritarian may have latent authoritarian tendencies upon which they act when certain threats are presented? Would that still seem like a doTerra product?

[BlueK]

I will admit that I started skimming about a a quarter of the way in. Any article that likes to boil things down to single term like "authoritarianism", to explain things kind of comes off as essential oils to me: "it cures EVERYTHING!"

Seems like you enjoy insulting the intelligence of people you disagree with. You might just have more in common with "the Donald" than you think!!

It's not about intelligence. It's about observing the way people answered questions about what they want in government. Those whose answers reveal a person who likes super strong government that more or less compels the population to fall in line falls under the grouping of authoritarian, and Trump is singling out and capturing that segment like few have ever done before. Some came from the Republican party, but many are independents, democrats, and folks who used to be non-participants in the political process.

[SeattleUte]

I love the armchair psychology that is going on in the popular media about the Trump phenomenon: " there has got to be some explanation for this!! What they hell is even happening!?!"

The explanation is very simple: there is a segment of republicans who feel like they repeatedly and systemically aren't being heard, and so they are going nuclear with their votes.

You can only get patted on the head for your frustrations so many times before you decide to escalate your reaction to it. The "Authoritarian" explanation captures this sentiment in part, but like most simplistic explanations, fails to explain how Trump is capturing so much of the vote. You can use all the "well, he is only capturing the rural stupid people" anecdote to explain part of his support, not all of it. I think that there are a significant number of his supporters that realize he is a caricature and believe he wouldn't really do the crazy things he says, and because he is such a wild card, you can imagine him to be really anything you want him to be underneath the "facade."

In the end, if Trump is elected, it will be for similar reasons that Putin was elected in Russia, however Trump is most definitely no Putin.

And we're supposed to love your armchair psychology?

[SeattleUte]

Read the link that YO provided. It provides a fairly compelling theory.

Oh brother. Don't believe everything you read.

[BlueK]

It would be nice if politicians in general were genuine wouldn't it?

Well, whether Trump means it or not, it's pretty universal through history that rising dictators signal well ahead what they plan to do. And many times most people just assume they aren't being serious until they get there and actually do it. Trump tells me what he stands for and I HATE IT. So I won't vote that piece of shit.

[SeattleUte]

I don't think they are all Republicans. I believe there is also a good portion of Trump's support that comes from working class independents and Dems.

There are also plenty of people with means and education who don't like the way the tax rate has gone. There are one-issue voters in this respect.