Is There a Real Alternative to the Ideas of Trumpism?

 

RTX1ZP41_trump_supporters-e1451321671210Let’s posit that Donald Trump’s polling power — particularly among white working-class voters — mostly reflects that group’s economic troubles and anxieties about the future. What sort of economically-sound agenda might resonate with these voters? Something other than border walls, immigrant roundups and deportation, and trade wars with Asia.

In his much buzzed-about The Atlantic piece, David Frum tries to outline just such an agenda:

Admittedly, this may be the most uncongenial thought of them all, but party elites could try to open more ideological space for the economic interests of the middle class. Make peace with universal health-insurance coverage: Mend Obamacare rather than end it. Cut taxes less at the top, and use the money to deliver more benefits to working families in the middle. Devise immigration policy to support wages, not undercut them. Worry more about regulations that artificially transfer wealth upward, and less about regulations that constrain financial speculation. …

Take seriously issues such as the length of commutes, nursing-home costs, and the anticompetitive practices that inflate college tuition. Remember that Republican voters care more about aligning government with their values of work and family than they care about cutting the size of government as an end in itself. Recognize that the gimmick of mobilizing the base with culture-war outrages stopped working at least a decade ago. Such a party would cut health-care costs by squeezing providers, not young beneficiaries. It would boost productivity by investing in hard infrastructure—bridges, airports, water-treatment plants. It would restore Dwight Eisenhower to the Republican pantheon alongside Ronald Reagan and emphasize the center in center-right.

1) This is directionally correct although I may differ on some particulars and wording.

For instance: universal health insurance should be a goal of center-right healthcare policy. As should major reform of Obamacare. But at some point “repeal” vs. “reform” or “ending” vs. “mending” becomes an unhelpful and distracting quibble. It’s like how many parts can you replace on your car before it’s really a different vehicle?

Imagine reform that a) continues to give subsidies to buy health insurance, b) nudges those who can afford it already to buy it, but c) is more geared toward financially protecting people from high-cost, low probability catastrophic events rather than providing comprehensive coverage. Would this repeal or reform Obamacare? Does it matter? Whatever you call it, this system would not return to the pre-Obamacare status quo or maintain the current one, while also moving us toward universal coverage.

2) Likewise, expanded government infrastructure spending and science research should be part of a pro-productivity agenda, but so should smart business tax reform and anti-cronyist deregulation. We need a ruthlessly competitive and dynamic private sector combined with a modernized safety net (including reforms of Social Security and Medicare).

But more broadly, GOP-leaning policymakers need to look at the actual problems facing middle-class voters today and respond with something more than promises of superfast growth driven by high-end tax cuts. Sure, Trump does offer just such a tax plan, but he talks about it far less than illegal immigration and trade. But Trump is about more than the substance or practicality of his policies. Combined with his inflammatory rhetoric and combative personal style, Trump’s ideas signal to working class voters that he “gets it” and that he’s just not another lobbyist-pleasing Washington politician. He’s a disruptor who’ll shatter the status quo.

3) So is a pro-growth/middle class/family conservative reform agenda adequate to counter Trumpian populism, especially if espoused by a traditional politician? I think so. Just as older politicians can appeal to younger voters, governors and senators can appeal to those looking for big change. Obama, Clinton, and Reagan all did this. Maybe Cruz, Rubio, Christie, or Bush can do the same.

But so far during this campaign there has been relatively little effort to offer clearly such a different agenda. Do GOP voters really know what the candidates would do about, say, making college more affordable and a better value? Maybe now would be a good time to start.

There are 47 comments.

Become a member to join the conversation. Or sign in if you're already a member.
  1. Kevin Creighton Contributor
    Kevin Creighton
    @KevinCreighton

    Trump is succeeding because he is spinning a good, nay, great, narrative: “Make America Great Again”. It’s been 32 years since we had a candidate who could make a play to the heartstrings like Trump can.

    Unfortunately for us, Trump lacks Reagan’s message of smaller government and Reagan’s ability to come up with policy, not platitudes.

    • #1
  2. BrentB67 Inactive
    BrentB67
    @BrentB67

    Didn’t we beat this horse last week?

    • #2
  3. The King Prawn Inactive
    The King Prawn
    @TheKingPrawn

    James Pethokoukis: What sort of economically-sound agenda might resonate with these voters?

    None. Their other guy is Sanders.

    • #3
  4. I Walton Member
    I Walton
    @IWalton

    His supporters are ignoring his progressive positions because he’s expressing anger at most of the consequences of those progressive positions.  I think what we need to do is shine lights on the truth and keep repeating it.   Yes the regulatory regime is a big part of the problem, but the resolution isn’t another layer nor better tweaks.  Moreover, big government in all its forms, including infrastructure spending by the Federal Government is also part of the problem.  I think a lot of us, including those who support Trump in spite of Trump’s progressive notions,  don’t want a game plan, a spin, and new twist.   Stick to the basics and the folks will figure it out even if the elite can’t because it’s not in their interests to do so.

    • #4
  5. Kwhopper Inactive
    Kwhopper
    @Kwhopper

    Imagine reform that a) continues to give subsidies to buy health insurance, b) nudges those who can afford it already to buy it, but c) is more geared toward financially protecting people from high-cost, low probability catastrophic events rather than providing comprehensive coverage. Would this repeal or reform Obamacare? Does it matter? Whatever you call it, this system would not return to the pre-Obamacare status quo or maintain the current one, while also moving us toward universal coverage.

    I can imagine unicorns. But that doesn’t make them any less impossible.

    Likewise, expanded government infrastructure spending and science research should be part of a pro-productivity agenda,

    Why? You say that kind of thing all the time, and then never explain the “should be” part. How does taking a $1, running it through the government mill, and reinvesting $0.50 make any sense?

    Do GOP voters really know what the candidates would do about, say, making college more affordable and a better value?

    The only conservative response is getting the Fed out of the college business. That’s why you don’t need to hear much about it – the answer is too simple.

    I have become so tired of James P. posts. As Brent (I think) has said before, he just throws this stuff out on Ricochet and never participates. There are almost always serious structural problems and presuppositions in his posts. I really wish he would defend them.

    • #5
  6. WI Con Member
    WI Con
    @WICon

    BrentB67:Didn’t we beat this horse last week?

    Yes, but AEI has noted it now so it didn’t happen.

    They’ll be crafting some type of policy paper where they increase the Child Care Tax Credit, couple that with some type of Middle East Intervention, extension of the Import/Export Bank, add in Job Training programs for displaced workers from the H1 program, generate a school choice paper and show that it can appease the white, non-college vote as well as the Hispanic vote (legal and fraudulent) without blowing up the non-Democrat coalition.

    Consider the can kicked.

    • #6
  7. BrentB67 Inactive
    BrentB67
    @BrentB67

    Kwhopper:

    Imagine reform that a) continues to give subsidies to buy health insurance, b) nudges those who can afford it already to buy it, but c) is more geared toward financially protecting people from high-cost, low probability catastrophic events rather than providing comprehensive coverage. Would this repeal or reform Obamacare? Does it matter? Whatever you call it, this system would not return to the pre-Obamacare status quo or maintain the current one, while also moving us toward universal coverage.

    I can imagine unicorns. But that doesn’t make them any less impossible.

    Likewise, expanded government infrastructure spending and science research should be part of a pro-productivity agenda,

    Why? You say that kind of thing all the time, and then never explain the “should be” part. How does taking a $1, running it through the government mill, and reinvesting $0.50 make any sense?

    Do GOP voters really know what the candidates would do about, say, making college more affordable and a better value?

    The only conservative response is getting the Fed out of the college business. That’s why you don’t need to hear much about it – the answer is too simple.

    I have become so tired of James P. posts. As Brent (I think) has said before, he just throws this stuff out on Ricochet and never participates. There are almost always serious structural problems and presuppositions in his posts. I really wish he would defend them.

    There is no defending the indefensible.

    • #7
  8. Ekosj Member
    Ekosj
    @Ekosj

    Coupl’a things…

    1.) Why does James ALWAYS think that the answer for whatever issue is on his radar is another Government program/policy?

    2.) Why does James never engage with the commenters? Makes me feel like an eight-year-old : “Hey Mrs. Pethokoukis, can James come out and play?”

    • #8
  9. EThompson Inactive
    EThompson
    @EThompson

    Cut taxes less at the top, and use the money to deliver more benefits to working families in the middle.

    The top percentile is the only demographic paying taxes! The U.S. govt needs no more money but an enormous reduction in expenditures.

    I used to like David Frum and actually met him at a book-signing for his insightful Dead Right but I’m afraid he’s gone AWOL on the GOP.

    Too bad really, because he’s a bright and handsome man with terrific taste in suits. :)

    Edit to include this observation: I used to subscribe to the Atlantic when they provided readers with gems such as Wolfowitz: The Exit Interviews.

    • #9
  10. Lazy_Millennial Inactive
    Lazy_Millennial
    @LazyMillennial

    James Pethokoukis:

    What sort of economically-sound agenda might resonate with these voters? Something other than border walls, immigrant roundups and deportation, and trade wars with Asia.

    Hey, you know those things y’all like? We’re gonna tell you you’re stupid for wanting them, then sell you on something else. I’m picturing a desperate Burger King owner, yelling at McDonald’s patrons that “charbroiled burgers are better!” when they choose McDonalds for the fries.

    • #10
  11. Austin Murrey Inactive
    Austin Murrey
    @AustinMurrey

    I honestly have no clue what Trump really believes – he’s running as a Republican so I’ll lump him in with GWB as what I call a “Kennedy Democrat”: basically someone who believes in government intervention to solve societal problems and is proud of America. They’re not small-government conservatives or libertarians and we tend to call them moderates these days.

    There’s lots of Kennedy Democrats in the Republican party these days because they’re not welcome in the Democratic Party: witness Joe Lieberman’s expulsion.

    I believe there are two problems with “Trumpism” that the GOP leadership/establishment/mainstream cannot counter because they refuse to admit the core issues could have merit.

    First, a lot of his initial support seemed to me to come from the idea that the current people in office are corrupt, lazy and/or stupid and it’s time we tried literally anyone else especially if they are against the corrupt, lazy and/or stupid. Trump is famous so his supporters believe he could win, and he says things like “America First” or “I’ll build a wall” which plenty of people like the idea of but sends the same people his supporters hate into convulsions.

    Second, it is emotion and not reason that governs humanity. This is the source of the much repeated “Who would you rather have a beer with?” or “Cares about people like me.” question that annoys us all so much everytime we lose an election. Trump doesn’t give his supporters homework, like tax plans, or five point pledges. He’s simply boiled down every presidential campaign (that isn’t a reelection bid) to its core message: “Things aren’t great right now, I’m great, vote for me and things will be great.” Every political campaign in history relies on that underlying premise.

    By harnessing resentment towards government and appealing purely to emotion he’s seemingly given people the proxy they want.

    Will it translate into votes? Who knows, this primary season is way too wacky for me.

    • #11
  12. Lazy_Millennial Inactive
    Lazy_Millennial
    @LazyMillennial

    My previous comment was pretty derogatory, so I’ll go ahead and defend all 3 things James dismisses:

    Immigration Roundups and Deportation- for almost every country in the world besides the US, including the EU before the refugee flood, deportation is exactly what happened to everyone who entered a country illegally or stayed past their permit. “Roundups” are only proposed because the law has been unenforced for so long. We bought “amnesty and enforcement” in the mid-80’s, and government gave up on enforcement. Want to entertain any discussion of amnesty/permanent legal status? Start enforcing the law first. And keep doing it, and don’t expect immediate bargaining when deportations “skyrocket up” from single to double digits.

    Border wall- this is necessary for basic immigration law enforcement. Again, we expect our federal government to enforce the law, and we support the existing laws governing who enters our country.

    Trade war with Asia- the American working class and small businesses have to deal with huge competition from abroad. The big businesses all lobby and get tax exemptions or trade protections. Don’t be mad when more pigs start asking for permission to eat from the government trough- stop putting food in it. I’d love a candidate who railed on corporate subsidies, while at the same time saying our corporate “protections” should mirror what our trade partners provide to their corporations, and not a penny more.

    And I’m not even a Trump supporter.

    • #12
  13. Randy Weivoda Moderator
    Randy Weivoda
    @RandyWeivoda

    If someone thinks those David Frum suggestions are good ones, why not just vote for Hillary Clinton?

    • #13
  14. BrentB67 Inactive
    BrentB67
    @BrentB67

    Lazy_Millennial:My previous comment was pretty derogatory, so I’ll go ahead and defend all 3 things James dismisses:

    Immigration Roundups and Deportation- for almost every country in the world besides the US, including the EU before the refugee flood, deportation is exactly what happened to everyone who entered a country illegally or stayed past their permit. “Roundups” are only proposed because the law has been unenforced for so long. We bought “amnesty and enforcement” in the mid-80’s, and government gave up on enforcement. Want to entertain any discussion of amnesty/permanent legal status? Start enforcing the law first. And keep doing it, and don’t expect immediate bargaining when deportations “skyrocket up” from single to double digits.

    Border wall- this is necessary for basic immigration law enforcement. Again, we expect our federal government to enforce the law, and we support the existing laws governing who enters our country.

    Trade war with Asia- the American working class and small businesses have to deal with huge competition from abroad. The big businesses all lobby and get tax exemptions or trade protections. Don’t be mad when more pigs start asking for permission to eat from the government trough- stop putting food in it. I’d love a candidate who railed on corporate subsidies, while at the same time saying our corporate “protections” should mirror what our trade partners provide to their corporations, and not a penny more.

    And I’m not even a Trump supporter.

    Very well done.

    • #14
  15. Mike LaRoche Inactive
    Mike LaRoche
    @MikeLaRoche

    I was going to add a comment, but Lazy_Millennial pretty much said what I’m thinking.

    • #15
  16. Jager Coolidge
    Jager
    @Jager

    James Pethokoukis: Let’s posit that Donald Trump’s polling power — particularly among white working-class voters — mostly reflects that group’s economic troubles and anxieties about the future. What sort of economically-sound agenda might resonate with these voters? Something other than border walls, immigrant roundups and deportation, and trade wars with Asia

    Things may be to far gone for this question. This group, as they support Trump, have bought into his “policy” prescriptions. So I am not sure that you are going to get them away from Immigration and Trade issues by offering them something else and assuring them it will be better.  What would you offer? Tax Credits?

    It may be that Trump is too extreme or boorish when talking about immigration. That said I do not think there is an economic agenda that will keep Trump supporters or agnostics from asking why we cannot enforce the immigration laws as they are written. Deportation and inability to work in the country are the current, but not enforced, law.

    • #16
  17. Jamie Lockett Inactive
    Jamie Lockett
    @JamieLockett

    Lazy_Millennial: Trade war with Asia- the American working class and small businesses have to deal with huge competition from abroad. The big businesses all lobby and get tax exemptions or trade protections. Don’t be mad when more pigs start asking for permission to eat from the government trough- stop putting food in it. I’d love a candidate who railed on corporate subsidies, while at the same time saying our corporate “protections” should mirror what our trade partners provide to their corporations, and not a penny more.

    Ending corporate subsidies is of course a worthy goal, but no good came of trade protections at any level. As Milton Friedman would argue – free trade is good for the American consumer regardless of what our trading partners do. All trade protectionism does it help the wealthiest of corporations at the expense of everyday Americans.

    • #17
  18. Big Green Inactive
    Big Green
    @BigGreen

    Lazy_Millennial:

    Trade war with Asia- the American working class and small businesses have to deal with huge competition from abroad. The big businesses all lobby and get tax exemptions or trade protections. Don’t be mad when more pigs start asking for permission to eat from the government trough- stop putting food in it. I’d love a candidate who railed on corporate subsidies, while at the same time saying our corporate “protections” should mirror what our trade partners provide to their corporations, and not a penny more.

    And I’m not even a Trump supporter.

    So you want a candidate the opposes corporate subsidies but also wants to provide subsidies in the form of trade protection?  If China wants to make its citizens poorer by providing US consumers cheap goods, it is great for us.  US trade policy should not be dependent on what other countries do…even if the US is the only country that engages in true free trade, US consumers are still better off.

    Also, what specific corporate subsidies do you want to eliminate?

    • #18
  19. EThompson Inactive
    EThompson
    @EThompson

    Big Green:

    Lazy_Millennial:

    Trade war with Asia- the American working class and small businesses have to deal with huge competition from abroad. The big businesses all lobby and get tax exemptions or trade protections. Don’t be mad when more pigs start asking for permission to eat from the government trough- stop putting food in it. I’d love a candidate who railed on corporate subsidies, while at the same time saying our corporate “protections” should mirror what our trade partners provide to their corporations, and not a penny more.

    And I’m not even a Trump supporter.

     If China wants to make its citizens poorer by providing US consumers cheap goods, it is great for us.

    I need to step in here on this China “cheap products” issue. You get what you pay for and every single time I buy anything made in that country it has to be replaced in 3-6 months. How are we saving?

    I’m consistently irritated at the time I spend replacing home products or even t-shirts because they don’t wear well. My favorite Lacoste shirt ($78 dollars) is now made in Peru and I’m afraid to wash it…

    I’d be willing to pay $90 dollars for it to made in the USA and if I could keep it for 18 months.

    • #19
  20. I Walton Member
    I Walton
    @IWalton

    Big Green:

    You are dead right.  Has anyone bothered to look at what we import from China that we had already lost, and for good reasons, to Japan, then Taiwan, Korea, Singapore, Mexico, Mtaylasia,  Thailand et al.   We had already lost most of  the labor intensive products and if we start beating up on China through the exchange rate, the way we did with Japan through voluntary quotas, they will move up scale even faster than they are.  The fix is reduced regulation, lower taxes, greater freedom.  Trump has the demagoguery right but nothing else.  What subsidies to end?  All of them.

    • #20
  21. Jamie Lockett Inactive
    Jamie Lockett
    @JamieLockett

    EThompson:

    Big Green:

    Lazy_Millennial:

    Trade war with Asia- the American working class and small businesses have to deal with huge competition from abroad. The big businesses all lobby and get tax exemptions or trade protections. Don’t be mad when more pigs start asking for permission to eat from the government trough- stop putting food in it. I’d love a candidate who railed on corporate subsidies, while at the same time saying our corporate “protections” should mirror what our trade partners provide to their corporations, and not a penny more.

    And I’m not even a Trump supporter.

    If China wants to make its citizens poorer by providing US consumers cheap goods, it is great for us.

    I need to step in here on this China “cheap products” issue. You get what you pay for and every single time I buy anything made in that country it has to be replaced in 3-6 months. How are we saving?

    I’m consistently irritated at the time I spend replacing home products or even t-shirts because they don’t wear well. My favorite Lacoste shirt ($78 dollars) is now made in Peru and I’m afraid to wash it…

    I’d be willing to pay $90 dollars for it to made in the USA and if I could keep it for 18 months.

    You can already do that. There are stores that sell products made in the USA. American Apparel sells clothing made in the USA for example. The point of Free Trade is that it provides more choice to consumers. There are products today that are in reach of the ordinary consumer that would have been unthinkable even 10 or 20 years ago.

    • #21
  22. Lazy_Millennial Inactive
    Lazy_Millennial
    @LazyMillennial

    Yo Big Green, I wanted to quote you, but on mobile Chrome the “quote” button isn’t showing up. To reply, yes, I want subsidies to corporations that directly compete with foreign companies where A) both corps have significant market share (say >10%), and B) the foreign corp is heavily subsidized by a foreign government. I like this more as a campaign talking point than all-encompassing law: once in office, I’d like the President to use it as a threat to encourage free trade from other countries.

    For example, I’m under the impression Airbus is significantly subsidized by France. I’m ok with the US subsidizing Boeing, if the President is advocating both countries drop their subsidies simultaneously.

    Subsidies I’d like ended: off the top of my head, the sugar subsidy, the ethanol mandate, most subsidies to “renewable energy” companies for “research”

    • #22
  23. Lazy_Millennial Inactive
    Lazy_Millennial
    @LazyMillennial

    Of course, overall free trade helps consumers, and when foreign governments subsidize foreign companies, they’re basically taxing their citizens to give us consumers a discount. But this deal has other winners (foreign company owners) and other losers too (American producers). Given how terrible the current situation is for the American working class and how high American corporate tax rates are, I would like a President who pursued free trade by using the threat of a policy that would help these two groups at the expense of the American Consumer. Put another way, free trade’s the goal, but unilateral disarmament can only take us so far

    • #23
  24. EThompson Inactive
    EThompson
    @EThompson

    Kevin Creighton:Trump is succeeding because he is spinning a good, nay, great, narrative: “Make America Great Again”. It’s been 32 years since we had a candidate who could make a play to the heartstrings like Trump can.

    Unfortunately for us, Trump lacks Reagan’s message of smaller government and Reagan’s ability to come up with policy, not platitudes.

    Donald Trump Teases a President Bid.

    He is consistent. Look at the faces of the audience members. :)

    • #24
  25. Big Green Inactive
    Big Green
    @BigGreen

    EThompson:

    If China wants to make its citizens poorer by providing US consumers cheap goods, it is great for us.

    I need to step in here on this China “cheap products” issue. You get what you pay for and every single time I buy anything made in that country it has to be replaced in 3-6 months. How are we saving?

    I’m consistently irritated at the time I spend replacing home products or even t-shirts because they don’t wear well. My favorite Lacoste shirt ($78 dollars) is now made in Peru and I’m afraid to wash it…

    I’d be willing to pay $90 dollars for it to made in the USA and if I could keep it for 18 months.

    You misunderstood what I wrote.  When I said “cheap”, I wasn’t making a reference to quality per se.  I was saying that if China wants to subsidize companies so they can “export” stuff at low prices, its good for us.

    • #25
  26. Big Green Inactive
    Big Green
    @BigGreen

    Lazy_Millennial:Of course, overall free trade helps consumers, and when foreign governments subsidize foreign companies, they’re basically taxing their citizens to give us consumers a discount. But this deal has other winners (foreign company owners) and other losers too (American producers). Given how terrible the current situation is for the American working class and how high American corporate tax rates are, I would like a President who pursued free trade by using the threat of a policy that would help these two groups at the expense of the American Consumer. Put another way, free trade’s the goal, but unilateral disarmament can only take us so far

    Although it is true that there are some “losers”, the point of trade is to consume.  Now one typically has to make something in order to trade it for something else, but producing for its own sake is rather silly.  In my view, the correct policy path in almost all instances is to pursue whatever is best for the American consumer.

    • #26
  27. Big Green Inactive
    Big Green
    @BigGreen

    Lazy_Millennial:Yo Big Green, I wanted to quote you, but on mobile Chrome the “quote” button isn’t showing up. To reply, yes, I want subsidies to corporations that directly compete with foreign companies where A) both corps have significant market share (say >10%), and B) the foreign corp is heavily subsidized by a foreign government. I like this more as a campaign talking point than all-encompassing law: once in office, I’d like the President to use it as a threat to encourage free trade from other countries.

    For example, I’m under the impression Airbus is significantly subsidized by France. I’m ok with the US subsidizing Boeing, if the President is advocating both countries drop their subsidies simultaneously.

    Subsidies I’d like ended: off the top of my head, the sugar subsidy, the ethanol mandate, most subsidies to “renewable energy” companies for “research”

    Airbus is subsidized by most large European governments, not just France.  As for your first paragraph, we will agree to disagree.  Your argument for subsidies in circumstance (A) doesn’t make much sense to me at all at would be an administrative nightmare due to being incredibly complicated and would introduce a plethora of opportunities for graft.

    • #27
  28. TKC1101 Inactive
    TKC1101
    @TKC1101

    Asserting my working class upbringing (my dad drove a truck and quit school in the 8th grade to help support the family, mom cleaned houses) perhaps I can shed a light that those handicapped by birth into wealth and privilege may struggle to grasp about “Trumpism”.

    Below is a list I am recycling from am old post about what drives the motivation for lower middle and working class voters.

    You will notice the list is most a desire for the elites to STOP doing stupid things, not a demand for a new , elaborate government program.   That is the essense of appealing to this group.

    1. Importing more low skilled foreign workers when we have millions out of the workforce
    2. Bringing in illegal immigrants with a welfare state paid for by the citizens
    3. Denouncing, vilifying and banning practice of the majority religion while promoting and protecting the one adhered to by the people killing innocent citizens
    4. Responding to the killing of citizens with the attempt to disarm the citizens and not the people who killed them
    5. Keeping interest rates so low that the modest income class has little way to save for a future
    6. Promoting an artificial crisis in the climate to impoverish the lifestyle of the people, reducing their electricity usage, forcing prices of food and goods up, promising people a dismal, cold in winter, hot in summer existence with limited use of water
    7. Delivering a completely deficient education paid for by their money with increasing costs, decreasing performance of students and using it for a tool for political and social indoctrination
    8. Using the entertainment media to insult and vilify their cherished beliefs, their families and their position in the social order
    9. After this group saw husbands , wives, sons and daughters do multiple tours , National Guard units sent overseas and the taking of cities with painful loss, they then saw the cities handed back without a thought. They now hear the drums pounding to go do it again.
    10. This group sees Federal mismanagement and out and out graft and criminality occur and no federal employee fired, lose a pension or anything other than get a paid vacation while on suspension
    11. Sending skilled jobs overseas with trade deals that are poorly thought out in terms of national capacity to produce tangible goods.
    • #28
  29. Hank Rhody Contributor
    Hank Rhody
    @HankRhody

    Campaigning on decreasing college tuition might not be a bad idea. Although the only things I can think of off the top of my head that would do that would sound bad to the general public.

    “Decrease tuition! great! We’ll stop subsidizing student loans, and research! The lack of perverse incentives will drive tuition prices down.”

    Long term, that’ll work. Short term, you’re making things more difficult for voters.

    • #29
  30. Guruforhire Member
    Guruforhire
    @Guruforhire

    TKC1101:Asserting my working class upbringing (my dad drove a truck and quit school in the 8th grade to help support the family, mom cleaned houses) perhaps I can shed a light that those handicapped by birth into wealth and privilege may struggle to grasp about “Trumpism”.

    Truth.

    • #30
Become a member to join the conversation. Or sign in if you're already a member.

Comments are closed because this post is more than six months old. Please write a new post if you would like to continue this conversation.