Kasich It Is

March 1, 2016

Comments

For probably the first time since I started voting back in 1984, I went to the polls this morning unsure for whom I was going to vote. As I noted Saturday, I was torn between voting for John Kasich, the candidate I’d most like to see as president, and Marco Rubio, the acceptable-to-me candidate with the best chance at winning the nomination.

In the end, I went with Kasich, figuring it was more important to signal the type of candidate I’d like to see the Republican Party nominate for the highest office in the land than to cast a strategic vote for a mediocre candidate who has little chance of winning Virginia, anyway.

I’m slowly resigning myself to the inevitability of Donald Trump securing the nomination and being faced with a choice between Hillary Clinton and a yet-to-materialize third party candidate. It’s truly remarkable that a nominating electorate that has consistently chosen qualified, moderate candidates over firebrands—who picked Mitt Romney as recently as four years ago—is going to choose a guy who can’t even bring himself to denounce David Duke. But it sure looks like it’s going to happen.

49 responses to “Kasich It Is”

Tillman

March 1, 2016 at 9:25 am

It’s truly remarkable that a nominating electorate that has consistently chosen qualified, moderate candidates over firebrands—who picked Mitt Romney as recently as four years ago—is going to choose a guy who can’t even bring himself to denounce David Duke. But it sure looks like it’s going to happen.

It’s worse than that. Romney did the sensible thing yesterday and denounced Trump for failing to condemn racists. He was then accused by fairly mainstream right-wing media types of being leftist.

This election is ludicrous.
Mikey

March 1, 2016 at 9:32 am

I felt the Bern. It’s time America started providing our people with the same basic things that literally every other developed nation in the world provides theirs.

Sure, his chances of winning Virginia are pretty slim, but it’s also not a winner-take-all state so the percentages matter.
Jen

March 1, 2016 at 9:38 am

At this stage, I’m waiting to see two things: who Trump chooses as a running mate, and if the RNC decides that preserving some dignity for the GOP is more important than winning. The decision not to hit back hard at Trump very early on over fears that he might bolt and run as an independent looks to be one of the biggest tactical errors in electoral politics. They may be able to claw back by running a third party candidate, or by somehow denying Trump the nomination at the convention. Either of these choices would seal their fate this election cycle, but may be far better for the party in the long run.

Trump’s choice of running mate will signal a lot.
CSK

March 1, 2016 at 9:53 am

@Jen:

Back in 2000, when Trump ran briefly for the presidency on the Reform Party ticket, he said that Oprah Winfrey would be his ideal running mate.

This time around? Maybe the Duck Dynasty guy who likes him.
bookdragon

March 1, 2016 at 10:09 am

Good for you. Kasich is the best of the GOP candidates. He’s not a clean as he appears from I hear from my friends back in Ohio (where the state GOP is trying to sweep under the rug a charter school scandal heavily involving one of his campaign managers), but he’s at least not as racist, xenophobic, callous, unprincipled and/or insane as the rest.

I consider his dismissive attitude toward allowing exceptions for the mother’s life for abortion disqualifying, so I wouldn’t vote for him, but I’d understand if my dad, who also doesn’t care for either Democrat, decided to write him in as a protest vote in Nov.
Jen

March 1, 2016 at 10:09 am

@CSK: But didn’t the Duck Dynasty guy endorse Cruz?

Or are there multiples of them, really, I don’t keep track.

I think choosing Oprah would cause some of his supporters’ heads to explode…(not that she’d agree to it).

This truly has been the oddest year.
Tillman

March 1, 2016 at 10:12 am

@Jen: My current, weak bet is Trump picks someone “establishment” to throw a bone to the party he’s usurped, but Trump has defied a lot of rules so far. I would think Christie would angle for Attorney General over VP, but who knows?
CSK

March 1, 2016 at 10:24 am

@Jen:

Willie Duck endorsed Trump and Phillie Duck endorsed Cruz.

That leaves us with the possibility of President…Donald Duck.
Scott

March 1, 2016 at 11:32 am

Since Texas is an open primary state, I decided to vote on the Republican ballots in able to choose the Sane people to run in the general. In that same vein, I also voted Kasich.
MarkedMan

March 1, 2016 at 11:48 am

A political party is not your family. They are not yours for life regardless of what they do. They shouldn’t even engender the same loyalty as a sports team because the control they exert over our government is too important for sentiment to override real deficiencies. Choosing a party should be more like choosing a hospital. In this case the Republican Party is seriously damaged and to continue to “bring your business there”‘ is actually harmful to the country.
Gustopher

March 1, 2016 at 12:27 pm

I am also shocked that Trump is going to be the nominee — it has confirmed all of my worst fears and stereotypes about the Republicans.

Unprincipled, ill tempered, racist idiots who care less about their country or governing than about sticking it to liberals. They don’t care about facts or reality. They’re simply disgusting people. And, they are the majority of the Republicans who vote in primaries.

No Republican should be offended when anyone says they are the party of racists. It’s not a fringe bunch of fellow travelers, it is the base of the party. Stroll over to Redstate.com and take a look — and watch as the far right Tea Party types are beginning to realize that they aren’t the base after all, and the base is going to nominate someone they describe as a NYC liberal.
Just ‘nutha ig’rant cracker

March 1, 2016 at 1:09 pm

A few years ago, I told one of my friends that the problem with the GOP–and by extension, the Conservative movement (IMHO)–was that they are willing to burn the country to the ground provided that they get to rule the ashes and rubble. He was shocked and appalled and told me that I had clearly lost my senses and lost my way.

He apologized for saying that a few weeks ago.
Jenos Idanian

March 1, 2016 at 2:20 pm

I see it’s falling to me to explain the Trump phenomenon to my alleged intellectual superiors who have absolutely no effing clue what’s going on, let alone how to deal with it.

There is a significant number of people among the Trump supporters who are called the “rubes,” the “bubbas,” and a host of other derogatory terms. These people have things they believe in, to various degrees.

They see politics as involving two groups that constitute the most influential factions on the national stage. “Group D” insults them, derides them, denigrates them, and dismisses them. The other group, Group R,” says all kinds of flattering things and supportive things whenever there’s an election coming up, then once the election is passed throws the Rubes a bone or two (the 2nd Amendment is a reliable one), then not only doesn’t deliver on the promises, but in many cases doesn’t even try. Further, they often join with “Group D” in insulting, deriding, denigrating, and dismissing them.

This has the effect of making the Rubes understandably angry and disenfranchised at both groups. And it’s hard to tell which they are more angry with — “Group D” is usually harsher, but at least they’re honest about it.

This brings us to Trump. To many people, Trump’s appeal isn’t centered around any particular policy or ideology or principle or belief. It’s that Trump’s campaign, in many cases, is essentially a giant middle finger to both “Group D” and “Group R.” And that is something that has near-universal appeal to the Rubes.

But they also have one other belief in common that unites them. They believe that, under the current system, their votes each count just as much as yours.

And they’re right on that point..

So, for all of you who feel so much superior and smarter and better than the Trump voters, if you’re so goddamned smart, how the hell haven’t you figured out how to deal with the Rubes?

So far, you seem to think that if you just double down on the insulting, deriding, denigrating, and dismissing them, you’ll manage to disenfranchise them. Then you’ll get your Kasich or maybe Rubio.

How’s that working out for you?

There’s a wonderful saying there “if it’s stupid but it works, it isn’t stupid.” It’s up there with “the definition of insanity is doing the same thing over and over, hoping for different results.” You’ve stuck with the insulting/deriding/denigrating/dismissing tack for ages, and look what it’s gotten you — Trump.

Keep that up, and he’ll be putting his hand on a Bible next January.
Just ‘nutha ig’rant cracker

March 1, 2016 at 3:00 pm

@Jenos Idanian:

They see politics as involving two groups that constitute the most influential factions on the national stage. “Group D” insults them, derides them, denigrates them, and dismisses them.

I’m having problems with this part of your hypothesis (which overall, is above your usual standards, so I progress with great fear and trepidation that I may be overtaxing you). Can you show me concrete examples of it? I ask this because my experience so far has been that has “insulte[d]” etc. those who you call “rubes” is what I would identify as “Group L/O” (identifiable in the words of such people as our esteemed host and his equally estimable minion who have on numerous occasions over my sojourn here described those who I believe you to be describing as “discontented losers” on a societal level).
CSK

March 1, 2016 at 3:52 pm

@Jenos Idanian:

Two things, Jenos:

1. I don’t think you’re aware of the level of contempt Trump has for his supporters. The man is a massively insecure arriviste.

2. You must realize that Trump can’t do what he’s promised his followers he’ll do without violating the Constitution and invoking martial law. They may not realize that, and Trump may or may not. If he does, that just makes the con more cynical and blatant.
Moosebreath

March 1, 2016 at 4:23 pm

@Jenos Idanian:

“There is a significant number of people among the Trump supporters who are called the “rubes,” the “bubbas,” and a host of other derogatory terms. These people have things they believe in, to various degrees.

They see politics as involving two groups that constitute the most influential factions on the national stage. “Group D” insults them, derides them, denigrates them, and dismisses them. The other group, Group R,” says all kinds of flattering things and supportive things whenever there’s an election coming up, then once the election is passed throws the Rubes a bone or two (the 2nd Amendment is a reliable one), then not only doesn’t deliver on the promises, but in many cases doesn’t even try. Further, they often join with “Group D” in insulting, deriding, denigrating, and dismissing them.”

Every single thing you said applies in reverse. Indeed, the same people whose shorts are atwist at being called “rubes” regularly state that they are the only “Real Americans”.

“But they also have one other belief in common that unites them. They believe that, under the current system, their votes each count just as much as yours.

And they’re right on that point.”

Actually, they don’t. They regularly point out how victories by Group D are not real because they rely on the votes of people who aren’t like them. They think that their votes should count more than ours.
David M

March 1, 2016 at 4:32 pm

@Jenos Idanian:

I think you’ve correctly described the fact that the Trump supporters feel like the GOP has ignored them, but you’ve stopped short of addressing it in any useful detail. The concerns of the Trump voter aren’t remotely the same as the concerns of movement Republicans, and some are actually the opposite.

To be clearer, if the GOP had been more successful these last 7 years, the Trump voters would be worse off. This is entirely a Republican problem, although the Democrats may be required to step up and clean up another GOP mess again.
Jenos Idanian

March 1, 2016 at 4:41 pm

@CSK: 1. I don’t think you’re aware of the level of contempt Trump has for his supporters. The man is a massively insecure arriviste.

2. You must realize that Trump can’t do what he’s promised his followers he’ll do without violating the Constitution and invoking martial law. They may not realize that, and Trump may or may not. If he does, that just makes the con more cynical and blatant.

Whether or not what you say is true, my answer is this: so what? How will that affect whether or not he gets elected?

He’s not my first choice, but I’d vote for him before Clinton or Sanders. I’m not one of those supporters, but I do know quite a few and I like to think I understand them somewhat.
Jenos Idanian

March 1, 2016 at 4:43 pm

@Just ‘nutha ig’rant cracker: I’m having problems with this part of your hypothesis (which overall, is above your usual standards, so I progress with great fear and trepidation that I may be overtaxing you). Can you show me concrete examples of it?

For readily-accessible examples, browse the comments threads on any number of postings here. Pay special attention to those by “Just ‘nutha ig’rant cracker,” but there are plenty of other examples at hand.
Jenos Idanian

March 1, 2016 at 4:48 pm

@David M: ;I think you’ve correctly described the fact that the Trump supporters feel like the GOP has ignored them, but you’ve stopped short of addressing it in any useful detail.

The first step in fixing a problem is properly identifying it. You (that’s the collective “you”) seemed to be having trouble with that step.

I don’t have anywhere near the problems with the “Rubes” that others do, so I don’t see it as as big a problem as you folks do. Therefore, I’m not overly interested in “fixing” it. I think a lot of their grievances are legit. I don’t agree with them on everything, but I do empathize with them.

You’re the ones who think that the situation is a problem that needs fixing, not me. I did far more than I felt obligated to by trying to express the perspective of the other side in terms I hoped you’d grasp.

How to “fix” it is up to you. To be perfectly candid, I am not convinced that it needs fixing, or that it’s even possible, but I felt a little obligated to offer a little hint or two.
Jenos Idanian

March 1, 2016 at 4:51 pm

@David M: This is entirely a Republican problem, although the Democrats may be required to step up and clean up another GOP mess again.

I’ll ignore the snotty tone at the end and point out that, at this point, it looks pretty damned likely that Trump will get the GOP nomination. At that point, it stops being strictly a “Republican” concern and a matter for all Americans to address.

Which, for me, would mean flipping off either Hillary or Bernie and voting for Trump. Like I said, he’s not my first choice (counting those already dropped out, I’d put at least 4 candidates ahead of him), but I prefer him of either Clinton or Sanders.
David M

March 1, 2016 at 4:57 pm

@Jenos Idanian:

So their grievances are legitimate, but you don’t want the GOP to actually address them? You’re arguing the Republicans should just continue the con?
DrDaveT

March 1, 2016 at 5:26 pm

@Jenos Idanian:

So, for all of you who feel so much superior and smarter and better than the Trump voters, if you’re so goddamned smart, how the hell haven’t you figured out how to deal with the Rubes?

We did, back in the days of the Founding Fathers. It’s called “an educated populace”.

Unfortunately, the GOP has managed to gut federal funding for education, and to protect local control of its content, precisely in order to prevent “dealing with the Rubes” in an effective and productive way. At the same time, they have implemented an extremely effective national disinformation and propaganda machine. It’s a powerful 1-2 punch; the sane have not yet come up with an effective counter.
DrDaveT

March 1, 2016 at 5:29 pm

@Jenos Idanian:

I prefer him [to] either Clinton or Sanders.

In other words, you plead insanity? Got it.
DrDaveT

March 1, 2016 at 7:08 pm

@DrDaveT:

At the same time, they have implemented an extremely effective national disinformation and propaganda machine.

It hadn’t really occurred to me until I wrote this, but we are starting to get scarily close to Big Brother levels of deliberate disinformation from an actual ‘governing’ political party. Between statements from serving Congressmen regarding climate change, evolution, reproductive biology, environmental and ecological hazards, etc.; the Fox News “War on Facts”; talk radio; and the self-selection of the blogosphere; there are significant numbers of people in the US today who get lots of Izvestia but no Pravda (as it were).
Ratufa

March 1, 2016 at 7:19 pm

Kudos to Jenos for his original post.

Two of the more accurate predictors as to whether a person is a Trump supporter are: 1) They feel that “people like me don’t have any say about what the government does”, and 2) They are a middle-aged white mail without a college degree, a group that has been hard hit by globalization, factory automation, etc.

To make some generalizations that won’t be true of everyone in the above groups, nor true of every Trump supporter:

These people are angry, and telling them that Trump’s campaign is a long con game is rather pointless, because they perceive their alternatives to be no better, and Trump is the only one flipping the bird at the establishments of both parties.

One argument I’ve heard in threads about this topic is that these people should be supporting Democrats, because Democratic policies are what will help them the most. I think there is some truth to that. Some of the things that mitigate against supporting Democrats are, 1) Some Democratic policies are perceived as charity, and few people want to be dependent on government charity; they would prefer to have decent jobs. 2) Democratic stands on various culture-related issues are often quite different from this group’s beliefs, and that sometimes comes across as contempt or condescension. 3) On the subject of immigration, there is a vast disconnect between the views of these people and the views of the political establishments of both parties.

With regards to immigration: For many of these people, racism plays a role, perhaps the primary role, in their opposition to immigration. But, there are also legitimate concerns about immigration, particularly for poorly-educated workers. See, for example:

https://newrepublic.com/article/113651/liberal-opposes-immigration-reform

Both the Democratic and Republican establishments have political and financial reasons not to bring up the problems that immigration may cause for unskilled workers (or, for that matter, to spend much time on the problems H1-B abuse causes for some more-skilled workers). However loathsome he may be, and however much he may be filled with horse crap, Trump is the only major candidate to talk about immigration in a strongly negative way.
Just ‘nutha ig’rant cracker

March 1, 2016 at 8:36 pm

@Jenos Idanian: So, I’ll take that for a “no” but give you a point for the attempt at snark.

And by the way, which “group” do you imagine that I belong to, “D” or “R?”
Just ‘nutha ig’rant cracker

March 1, 2016 at 8:45 pm

@Ratufa: Thank you! You did a nice job of bringing some tangibility to a part of Jenos’ comment that troubled me.

@Jenos Idanian: You should hire Ratufa as your spokesperson. He’s much better at stating your views. Please feel free to try to answer me again by copying whatever portions of Ratufa’s post that you feel will strengthen your previous response (but be sure to get Ratufa’s permission first 🙂 ).
James Pearce

March 1, 2016 at 8:52 pm

@Jenos Idanian:

I don’t have anywhere near the problems with the “Rubes” that others do, so I don’t see it as as big a problem as you folks do.

But you still think they’re rubes?

I felt obligated to by trying to express the perspective of the other side in terms I hoped you’d grasp.

I guess I’m just too cynical to believe the “perspective of the other side” is Boohoo, you hurted my feewings, so I call BS on this assessment.

I mean, I know we took your lightbulbs away and made you get health insurance, but Donald Trump isn’t about to become the Republican nominee for president because millions of people are butt-hurt.

Might it actually be because the Republican Party’s relationship with its voters is genuinely dysfunctional?
Steve V

March 1, 2016 at 8:58 pm

@James Pearce: I’m pretty sure Jenos always thinks it’s the Democrats’ fault.
Jenos Idanian

March 1, 2016 at 9:16 pm

@Moosebreath: Every single thing you said applies in reverse. Indeed, the same people whose shorts are atwist at being called “rubes” regularly state that they are the only “Real Americans”.

That is a thoroughly stupid point in this context. I’m not advocating, I’m translating. Saying “but they’re wrong” doesn’t change a damned thing in what they believe or what they do.

You need to figure out a way to either persuade them or nullify them if you don’t want them to win. Being snotty towards them was a large factor in their motivations; are you really so stupid that you think that continued snottiness will make them less motivated?
Moosebreath

March 1, 2016 at 9:21 pm

@Jenos Idanian:

“I’m not advocating, I’m translating. Saying “but they’re wrong” doesn’t change a damned thing in what they believe or what they do. ”

I am translating what they say as well. I’m not saying they are wrong — I am saying they are as guilty of denigrating the other side as they feel is done to them.

And your failure to respond to the point about them thinking their vote should count more than those of the other side is duly noted.
Jenos Idanian

March 1, 2016 at 9:21 pm

@James Pearce: I have no idea what your disparaging opinions of me have to do with the topic at hand, but you really didn’t need to reassert it. I assure you, I am fully aware of your opinion of me, and further assure you that it’s mutual.
Jenos Idanian

March 1, 2016 at 9:33 pm

@Moosebreath: I am translating what they say as well. I’m not saying they are wrong — I am saying they are as guilty of denigrating the other side as they feel is done to them.

You really are insisting on being an a-hole here, and I don’t feel like engaging with you over this. I have zero interest in either advocating or attacking their beliefs. I think they’re right in some areas, wrong in others, and that’s all I feel like saying on that topic.

Maybe you think that if you can out-argue me, you can somehow put this whole movement at a disadvantage. That’s not just wrong, it’s wrong on at least three levels.
Moosebreath

March 1, 2016 at 9:49 pm

@Jenos Idanian:

“You really are insisting on being an a-hole here, and I don’t feel like engaging with you over this. I have zero interest in either advocating or attacking their beliefs. I think they’re right in some areas, wrong in others, and that’s all I feel like saying on that topic.”

No, I’m not. I am not bringing you and your beliefs into this at all. I am not even bringing their beliefs into this. All I am saying is that they need to remove their blinders and recognize that they are doing the same thing to the other side as they are accusing the other side of doing to them. I am trying to do is to show them the other side of the coin and have them experience empathy.

If they feel slighted at being called rubes, how do they think the other side feels about being called not-real Americans? And if the other side slighting them is sufficiently wrong that they feel aggrieved by it to the extent that they want to blow up the body politic over it, how do they think the other side feels when they do it?
Jenos Idanian

March 1, 2016 at 9:56 pm

@Ratufa: You make quite a few excellent points, and I appreciate your efforts in summing up and interpreting my ideas. I disagree with you on several points.

1) Your categorization of Trump’s position — and that of a lot of conservatives — as “anti-immigrant” is very shallow. Nearly all of the anti- is oriented against the illegal aliens, and utterly irrelevant to legal immigrants. The aspects that would affect legal immigrants would be the restrictions on the H-1B visas that are being used to put American workers of out jobs, and immigrants that have a higher risk of turning terrorist. For most immigrants, the policies should be irrelevant.

2) One could easily make an argument that it’s Republican policies are where the working classes should find the most comfort, and be just as accurate. When couched in vague, idealistic terms, both sides can make their positions sound perfectly fine and sound and reasonable and appealing — just in different ways.

But again, the crux of the matter here is how to deal with the reality of the situation. And one aspect of political reality is that, in many cases, what one person calls “truth” is false to others. You need to deal with what people perceive to be true, not what you perceive to be true.

Just presenting your case isn’t enough. You need to find a way to present it in a way that your target audience will accept it, and that includes countering the arguments that have kept them from buying into it thus far.
James Pearce

March 1, 2016 at 11:54 pm

@Jenos Idanian:

I assure you, I am fully aware of your opinion of me, and further assure you that it’s mutual.

Despite your assurances, I remain unconvinced.

@Steve V:

I’m pretty sure Jenos always thinks it’s the Democrats’ fault.

Hell, he doesn’t even have to think about it.
Jenos Idanian

March 2, 2016 at 8:20 am

@Moosebreath: All I am saying is that they need to remove their blinders and recognize that they are doing the same thing to the other side as they are accusing the other side of doing to them. I am trying to do is to show them the other side of the coin and have them experience empathy.

Why do they need to remove their blinders? How are you trying show them anything?

The first rule of persuasion is to find a connection with your audience. Trump knows this, and lives by it. And he has two ways he does this.

1) He doesn’t pull the “I had a rough life, too” game that so many try because everyone knows that would be bullshit. He doesn’t act ashamed of his wealth and success — he embraces it, he revels in it. And that works because it comes across as honest.

2) His core message boils down to “you’re angry, and I’m angry too, and we’re justified in being angry.” That resonates.

Your attempt comes across as “I’m smart, you’re stupid, so sit down and shut up until you get smarter.” Go ahead and defend it as accurate if that floats your boat. On the standard of “how effective a message is it,” it’s a huge failure.

And by embracing it, you make yourself look like an insecure egomaniac who wants to assert your own superiority over pretty much anything else, who’d be perfectly happy losing as long as you can still tell yourself that it doesn’t matter, you’re still smarter.

Hope you find that satisfying.
Moosebreath

March 2, 2016 at 8:48 am

@Jenos Idanian:

“Hope you find that satisfying.”

Nope, I found it the ravings of a person who feels that only by closing his ears will he hear the truth. Unfortunately, all he is hearing is the echo of his own thoughts.

As for the Trump supporters, your interpretation reeks of them saying that they are the only people who have been hurt by the last few decades of American politics, and that only they can claim victimhood. And I am pointing out that they themselves are attacking others in the same boat as they are in, and doing it in very similar ways to how they perceive themselves as being attacked. So if they want the ones they are attacking to make common cause with them, the first thing they should do is stop attacking them.

If that comes across as saying “I’m smart”, then you have a very low standard of what is smart, as not alienating the very people you want help from is the sort of thing most people learn in elementary school.
Jenos Idanian

March 2, 2016 at 2:04 pm

@Moosebreath: Let me explain why you’re coming across as an idiot.

I am explaining these people to you, to the best of my ability. .I am saying “this is what they believe, this is what they think, this is why they act the way they do” in hopes that you can better understand them, because understanding such things is essential to any meaningful interactions.

Your response is to assume that I am advocating for them, that I am one of them, and attacking those beliefs as if they were mine. Setting aside that fallacy, I ask you: when has that approach ever achieved anything constructive? It makes you look like an a-hole and is practically guaranteed to make the other side double down on their stance.

But it makes you look smart and tough among your peers, so I guess there’s that. If you need that kind of ego-stroking, then go for it. It’ll actually hurt the chances of forming a rapprochement, but that’s a small price to pay for your little political masturbation, is it?

For anyone else still reading along, let me give you one free gift, a little insight into one aspect that drives a lot of the Trump supporters. And for idiots like Moose, let me spell it out: I am not saying I personally hold this belief, I am not saying that it’s factually based, but it is something a lot of people believe in, and simply telling them they’re stupid for believing it doesn’t help.

Now, with that out of the way, one of the common themes among Democratic politicians (you hear this sort of thing from Hillary, for example), is “I will fight for women, I will fight for gays, I will fight for minorities, I will fight for immigrants, I will fight for the poor,” and so on — a whole laundry list.

How can anyone disagree with that?

Well, what if you’re not on that laundry list? You’re not a woman, you’re not gay, you’re not a minority, you’re not an immigrant, you’re not poor (you’re not rich, but you’re doing OK), and so on. So the options there are two:

1) You will be ignored.

2) You will be one of those the politician is fighting against.

In either case, where’s your motivation for voting for that politician?

Trump is basing his appeal in a more general sense. By not targeting any particular identity for his appeal, he lets his audience fill in the blanks however they want to. He talks about how we, as a nation, need to have someone willing to fight for us.

Even more cleverly, he’s focused his attacks on other countries, illegal aliens, criminals, and the like. And those groups tend to have one thing in common: they can’t legally vote anyway.

It’s a pretty simple strategy. And so far, it’s working very well.
Moosebreath

March 2, 2016 at 2:21 pm

@Jenos Idanian:

That was a nice rant. Now let me explain why you are coming across as an idiot. You are continuing to pretend that I am:

a. saying that you are advocating for them. I have not said that. Never. Not even once.

b. attacking the views of the “rubes” as you called them. Again, I have not done that. Not even once.

So when you repeatedly say that I am doing what anyone whose English reading skills have progressed beyond kindergarten can see is not true, you look like an idiot. It’s that simple.

What I have done, and done repeatedly, is point out that the “rubes” are doing the exact same thing to the other half of the country as they feel is being done to them. I have given examples of it. Examples which you have never bothered to respond to. And I have explained that is not a productive course of action for them.

Now you can either actually respond to what I have written, you can once again mischaracterise what I have written, or you can climb back into your hole. Your call.
C. Clavin

March 2, 2016 at 3:04 pm

is going to choose a guy who can’t even bring himself to denounce David Duke.

But he has denounced Duke. Before he refused to renounce Duke. He’s a grifter. A world class grifter. He has conned 40% of the Republican electorate. He is selling whatever you are buying. It all depends on who he is talking to. In South Carolina the message is different from New York. I imagine that will blow up in his face before the first Tuesday in November…as the focus on him grows more intense than it has been from the sycophants in the right wing echo chamber. But you never know.
James Pearce

March 2, 2016 at 4:21 pm

@Jenos Idanian: “Let me explain why you’re coming across as an idiot,” said no reasonable person ever.
Jenos Idanian

March 2, 2016 at 4:41 pm

@James Pearce: That’s my giving up on establishing a civil discourse with Moose. I am trying to explain a foreign perspective; he wants to argue why it isn’t valid.

That is irrelevant because it’s valid to the people who believe it. And denying that reality is a really good way of demonstrating that one is more interested in establishing dominance than having a discussion.

I’ve played those games way too many times to find them the least bit appealing here.
C. Clavin

March 2, 2016 at 5:03 pm

@Jenos Idanian:

That is irrelevant because it’s valid to the people who believe it. And denying that reality is a really good way of demonstrating that one is more interested in establishing dominance than having a discussion.

Well now…aren’t you just the cutest little post-modernist??? Facts no longer matter…only what Jenos feels.
James Pearce

March 2, 2016 at 6:41 pm

@Jenos Idanian:

I am trying to explain a foreign perspective; he wants to argue why it isn’t valid.

I took Moosebreath’s point to be that this perspective isn’t foreign, or unique to Republican voters.
Just ‘nutha ig’rant cracker

March 2, 2016 at 7:09 pm

@Jenos Idanian: No, the first rule of persuasion is have a credible argument.
Moosebreath

March 2, 2016 at 8:07 pm

@James Pearce:

“I took Moosebreath’s point to be that this perspective isn’t foreign, or unique to Republican voters.”

Exactly. The Democrats know exactly how the Republicans feel, because the Republicans have been doing it to the Democrats for years, in pretty much the same way. And expecting the Democrats to stop saying the things which annoy the Republicans while the Republicans continue to say the same things about Democrats is not likely to work.
Jenos Idanian

March 3, 2016 at 9:02 am

@Just ‘nutha ig’rant cracker: No, the first rule of persuasion is have a credible argument.

Close, but so wrong. It’s to have an argument that’s credible to the people you’re attempting to persuade.

As far as I’m concerned, Obama never put forth a credible argument for voting for him. But that didn’t matter; he put forth an argument that was credible to enough people to vote for him twice.