The Republican political party, in the US

To post in this sub-forum you must have made 100 posts or have Trust status or have completed our ID Verification

Forums › Politics › The Republican political party, in the US

1 | 2

Fred99

13684 posts

Uber Geek

#1973259 12-Mar-2018 14:41

MikeAqua:

Fred99:

There are plenty of people who support "Trumpism" (misogyny, racism, populist nationalism) outside the US. Too many in NZ.

I sometimes wonder if that kind of portrayal actually galvanises support for Trump.

Would a reasoned demolition of his policies by the leftish leaning media achieve more than the shrill journalism seen to date?

Again, research the demographics of who voted for Trump. Big chunks of reasonable and middle voters. People that should be able to be influenced.

Well I put "Trumpism" in quotation marks for a reason, as without doubt that movement is defined by anti-liberalism and again without doubt at very best tolerates and at worst encourages misogyny, racism, and populist nationalism movements everywhere.

One of the people who helped put Trump where he is was in France the other day, addressing their fascist league - Front National, encouraging them to wear accusations made of them being racist or fascist proudly - like a badge. And that crowd cheered.

Geektastic

17943 posts

Uber Geek

Trusted

Lifetime subscriber

#1973383 12-Mar-2018 16:05

MikeAqua:

Fred99:

There are plenty of people who support "Trumpism" (misogyny, racism, populist nationalism) outside the US. Too many in NZ.

I sometimes wonder if that kind of portrayal actually galvanises support for Trump.

Would a reasoned demolition of his policies by the leftish leaning media achieve more than the shrill journalism seen to date?

Again, research the demographics of who voted for Trump. Big chunks of reasonable and middle voters. People that should be able to be influenced.

I met a very well heeled lawyer in California shortly before the election, with degrees from top class institutions, who was 110% in favour of Trump.

I don't think New Zealanders are equipped to deal with rationalising things like Trump or Brexit very well for the simple reason that nobody has ever placed New Zealand under the same sort of perceived or actual existential threat. It's too easy for people here to condemn the thinking of those who support the concepts such as Trump or Brexit.

The closest I can get is the housing/immigration thing. Look at the support for banning foreigners from buying houses. Now imagine that multiplied up if 26 other countries had the right to simply rock up with no paperwork and settle down, or there was a large poor country attached with a porous land border through which thousands of illegal immigrants poured annually.

I suspect many New Zealanders would be far less liberal in their opinions in those circumstances.

Fred99

13684 posts

Uber Geek

#1973446 12-Mar-2018 18:18

Geektastic:

MikeAqua:

Fred99:

There are plenty of people who support "Trumpism" (misogyny, racism, populist nationalism) outside the US. Too many in NZ.

I sometimes wonder if that kind of portrayal actually galvanises support for Trump.

Would a reasoned demolition of his policies by the leftish leaning media achieve more than the shrill journalism seen to date?

Again, research the demographics of who voted for Trump. Big chunks of reasonable and middle voters. People that should be able to be influenced.

I met a very well heeled lawyer in California shortly before the election, with degrees from top class institutions, who was 110% in favour of Trump.

I don't think New Zealanders are equipped to deal with rationalising things like Trump or Brexit very well for the simple reason that nobody has ever placed New Zealand under the same sort of perceived or actual existential threat. It's too easy for people here to condemn the thinking of those who support the concepts such as Trump or Brexit.

The closest I can get is the housing/immigration thing. Look at the support for banning foreigners from buying houses. Now imagine that multiplied up if 26 other countries had the right to simply rock up with no paperwork and settle down, or there was a large poor country attached with a porous land border through which thousands of illegal immigrants poured annually.

I suspect many New Zealanders would be far less liberal in their opinions in those circumstances.

I'd say that average NZers have a far greater awareness of global issues than many in the USA or the UK, are probably on average more travelled, and as a country we're continually reminded of our vulnerability to trade disputes, and have had plenty to think about over the past 100 years, over our role in defending freedom and being dragged in to wars that weren't even remotely of our making.

It doesn't surprise me that a well heeled and well educated person may have voted for Trump, even though that's the exception rather than the rule. I wonder if he had it worked out that when Trump was talking about "draining the swamp", there would be countless opportunities to refill it.

tdgeek

29746 posts

Uber Geek

Trusted

Lifetime subscriber

#1973487 12-Mar-2018 19:13

Fred99:

Geektastic:

MikeAqua:

Fred99:

There are plenty of people who support "Trumpism" (misogyny, racism, populist nationalism) outside the US. Too many in NZ.

I sometimes wonder if that kind of portrayal actually galvanises support for Trump.

Would a reasoned demolition of his policies by the leftish leaning media achieve more than the shrill journalism seen to date?

Again, research the demographics of who voted for Trump. Big chunks of reasonable and middle voters. People that should be able to be influenced.

I met a very well heeled lawyer in California shortly before the election, with degrees from top class institutions, who was 110% in favour of Trump.

I don't think New Zealanders are equipped to deal with rationalising things like Trump or Brexit very well for the simple reason that nobody has ever placed New Zealand under the same sort of perceived or actual existential threat. It's too easy for people here to condemn the thinking of those who support the concepts such as Trump or Brexit.

The closest I can get is the housing/immigration thing. Look at the support for banning foreigners from buying houses. Now imagine that multiplied up if 26 other countries had the right to simply rock up with no paperwork and settle down, or there was a large poor country attached with a porous land border through which thousands of illegal immigrants poured annually.

I suspect many New Zealanders would be far less liberal in their opinions in those circumstances.

I'd say that average NZers have a far greater awareness of global issues than many in the USA or the UK, are probably on average more travelled, and as a country we're continually reminded of our vulnerability to trade disputes, and have had plenty to think about over the past 100 years, over our role in defending freedom and being dragged in to wars that weren't even remotely of our making.

It doesn't surprise me that a well heeled and well educated person may have voted for Trump, even though that's the exception rather than the rule. I wonder if he had it worked out that when Trump was talking about "draining the swamp", there would be countless opportunities to refill it.

Exactly. Ive spent a lot of time there. My opinion is that they are VERY patriotic, VERY uneducated about what happens and what IS the world outside the US. If anyone is Demo or GOP they are highly likely to be ALL IN. When there is dissent, there is nowhere to go except the other side. Trump did that superbly, marketing excellence. Sadly, its the running of a country that went to marketing excellence, rather than Government excellence. I honestly could not care less, as the value is "my god we will never do this again". Hopefully in the next election and beyond we will see more statesmen and less marketing. Or more likely less marketing and a bit more statesman. Statesman being a generic term not a male vs female term. In the meantime while he has riled up a few, he has not really done anything extreme, in context.

Fred99

13684 posts

Uber Geek

#1973513 12-Mar-2018 19:51

tdgeek:

Trump did that superbly, marketing excellence. Sadly, its the running of a country that went to marketing excellence, rather than Government excellence.

Ahhh - "marketing". I could really rant here, but I'll keep it brief. Selling happiness works best when it's easing our innate fears and insecurities. It only stands to reason that this would be extended to marketing being in the business of creating fear and insecurity - but wait - they have the solution.

This, I believe, is the reason why we're seeing a shift to right-wing politics, in countries and at a time when the world's never been safer and more secure.

It needs to end - it's so f$cking stupid.

wsnz

649 posts

Ultimate Geek

#1973612 12-Mar-2018 22:12

Geektastic:

The closest I can get is the housing/immigration thing. Look at the support for banning foreigners from buying houses. Now imagine that multiplied up if 26 other countries had the right to simply rock up with no paperwork and settle down, or there was a large poor country attached with a porous land border through which thousands of illegal immigrants poured annually.

What twenty six countries have the right to "rock up with no paperwork and settle down" with respect to the USA?

Geektastic

17943 posts

Uber Geek

Trusted

Lifetime subscriber

#1973650 12-Mar-2018 22:42

wsnz:

Geektastic:

The closest I can get is the housing/immigration thing. Look at the support for banning foreigners from buying houses. Now imagine that multiplied up if 26 other countries had the right to simply rock up with no paperwork and settle down, or there was a large poor country attached with a porous land border through which thousands of illegal immigrants poured annually.

What twenty six countries have the right to "rock up with no paperwork and settle down" with respect to the USA?

No. Brexit.

Sharesies kids

Free kids accounts - trade shares and funds (NZ, US) with Sharesies (affiliate link).

Geektastic

17943 posts

Uber Geek

Trusted

Lifetime subscriber

#1973652 12-Mar-2018 22:56

Fred99:

Geektastic:

MikeAqua:

Fred99:

There are plenty of people who support "Trumpism" (misogyny, racism, populist nationalism) outside the US. Too many in NZ.

I sometimes wonder if that kind of portrayal actually galvanises support for Trump.

Would a reasoned demolition of his policies by the leftish leaning media achieve more than the shrill journalism seen to date?

Again, research the demographics of who voted for Trump. Big chunks of reasonable and middle voters. People that should be able to be influenced.

I met a very well heeled lawyer in California shortly before the election, with degrees from top class institutions, who was 110% in favour of Trump.

I don't think New Zealanders are equipped to deal with rationalising things like Trump or Brexit very well for the simple reason that nobody has ever placed New Zealand under the same sort of perceived or actual existential threat. It's too easy for people here to condemn the thinking of those who support the concepts such as Trump or Brexit.

The closest I can get is the housing/immigration thing. Look at the support for banning foreigners from buying houses. Now imagine that multiplied up if 26 other countries had the right to simply rock up with no paperwork and settle down, or there was a large poor country attached with a porous land border through which thousands of illegal immigrants poured annually.

I suspect many New Zealanders would be far less liberal in their opinions in those circumstances.

I'd say that average NZers have a far greater awareness of global issues than many in the USA or the UK, are probably on average more travelled, and as a country we're continually reminded of our vulnerability to trade disputes, and have had plenty to think about over the past 100 years, over our role in defending freedom and being dragged in to wars that weren't even remotely of our making.

It doesn't surprise me that a well heeled and well educated person may have voted for Trump, even though that's the exception rather than the rule. I wonder if he had it worked out that when Trump was talking about "draining the swamp", there would be countless opportunities to refill it.

Yes, you probably would say that. I have, though met a surprising number of people here who do not travel any further than Australia or Fiji and some who do not get that far - a 21 year old who has been to the south island as his furthest trip and a 67 year old who had never left the north island, for example.

All nations are vulnerable to trade disputes and NZ wasn't dragged into war any more than anyone else to be honest. You're colouring history with modern interpretation because it's more likely that the people of the time considered what they were doing to be a Good Thing - but that is OT.

My point is that nobody (well, save for the Japanese in WW2 perhaps) has placed NZ at existential threat in such a way that a massive political backlash such as a Trump or Brexit - or recently in both Italy and Germany, the success of nationalist parties that would probably have lost their deposits in elections 25 years ago - is the likely outcome.

There is a tendency not to realise the luxury that being in NZ offers in relation to avoiding these sorts of things - as well as terrorism - and then assume that anyone who votes for what looks like a solution to them must be mad. If half as much energy as is devoted to Trump was devoted to solving more local problems I expect we'd see quite a lot of improvements.

We are fortunate not to need a Trump, or a Brexit or whatever in NZ. I'm fairly sure that if circumstances changed and we suddenly DID need that, there would be no shortage of people voting for it.

Fred99

13684 posts

Uber Geek

#1973667 12-Mar-2018 23:33

Geektastic:

Post-war calculations indicated that New Zealand's ratio of killed per million of population (at 6684) was the highest in the Commonwealth (with Britain at 5123 and Australia, 3232).

Don't kid yourself that distance was a barrier to NZer's feeling the full impact, and treating the threat of the WW2 version of fascism every bit as seriously as England did, despite England having closer proximity to "the action".

I find your attitude to generalise native born NZer's as naive "out of touch" colonials, and trivialise our past, rather offensive.

MikeAqua

7782 posts

Uber Geek

#1973825 13-Mar-2018 10:41

Fred99:

Geektastic:

Post-war calculations indicated that New Zealand's ratio of killed per million of population (at 6684) was the highest in the Commonwealth (with Britain at 5123 and Australia, 3232).

Don't kid yourself that distance was a barrier to NZer's feeling the full impact, and treating the threat of the WW2 version of fascism every bit as seriously as England did, despite England having closer proximity to "the action".

I find your attitude to generalise native born NZer's as naive "out of touch" colonials, and trivialise our past, rather offensive.

Taking offence is the last refuge of a person losing an argument.

I'm a born NZr.

While NZ's losses were high, we didn't have bombs and rockets dropping into our cities and towns, children killed, suburbs decimated etc. The British had all of that on top of comparable losses of service personnel.

If my memory is correct (may not be) the only actual warfare in NZ was the mine that sunk the Niagra.

Mike

Fred99

13684 posts

Uber Geek

#1973909 13-Mar-2018 12:08

MikeAqua:

Fred99:

Geektastic:

Post-war calculations indicated that New Zealand's ratio of killed per million of population (at 6684) was the highest in the Commonwealth (with Britain at 5123 and Australia, 3232).

Don't kid yourself that distance was a barrier to NZer's feeling the full impact, and treating the threat of the WW2 version of fascism every bit as seriously as England did, despite England having closer proximity to "the action".

I find your attitude to generalise native born NZer's as naive "out of touch" colonials, and trivialise our past, rather offensive.

Taking offence is the last refuge of a person losing an argument.

I'm a born NZr.

While NZ's losses were high, we didn't have bombs and rockets dropping into our cities and towns, children killed, suburbs decimated etc. The British had all of that on top of comparable losses of service personnel.

If my memory is correct (may not be) the only actual warfare in NZ was the mine that sunk the Niagra.

Not to be too pedantic I hope, but the figures I stated above were total losses, not just "service personnel". On a per-capita basis, NZ losses at 40% higher than British losses stated as "comparable" is rather an understatement.

No - we didn't get rockets and bombs.

Perhaps people arguing about WW2 and also suggesting that the history of this experience justifies support of movements based on populism and nationalism need a history lesson.

MikeAqua

7782 posts

Uber Geek

#1973954 13-Mar-2018 13:35

Fred99:

Perhaps people arguing about WW2 and also suggesting that the history of this experience justifies support of movements based on populism and nationalism need a history lesson.

Justifies and explain are two very different things. And all political campaigns are inherently populist to an extent. Ardern for example could very easily be characterised as a populist campaigner. Peters even more so.

Mike

Fred99

13684 posts

Uber Geek

#1973984 13-Mar-2018 14:10

MikeAqua:

Fred99:

Perhaps people arguing about WW2 and also suggesting that the history of this experience justifies support of movements based on populism and nationalism need a history lesson.

Justifies and explain are two very different things. And all political campaigns are inherently populist to an extent. Ardern for example could very easily be characterised as a populist campaigner. Peters even more so.

Peters could quite rightly be described as a populist and a nationalist - though in my opinion he's toned down his racist/nationalist rhetoric from the past, whether that's a result of having to compromise in order to have credibility in potential coalitions or he realised that he was on a hiding to nowhere.

Jacinda Ardern is about as populist as John Key. I think there's confusion there between popular and populist but agree that all campaigns are populist to a point - the different sides tend to disagree on their opinion of who the privileged elites happen to be.

When I typed "populism and nationalism" I should have included authoritarianism, there was a touch of that in Peters, and also a touch in some of the hard-liners in the National Party. How "Crusher" Collins got her nickname for example - a popular authoritarian action that achieved very little - if anything at all.

1 | 2