Trump and Obama: a deeper resemblance
On the surface—in personality and speech characteristics—Donald Trump is nothing like Barack Obama. In fact, you might say he’s the un-Obama.
Obama’s most salient characteristics (at least, as his supporters and the press see him) include being smooth, intellectual, and articulate. He likes to lecture at us from a position of supposed superiority. One would never describe Trump that way. But underneath Obama’s surface smoothness lies the strongman who is actively trying to circumvent and/or destroy parts of the Constitution if it stands in the way of what he wants to do, despite Obama’s rep as the supposed constitutional law prof and scholar. Obama sees the Constitution as a negative restraining influence to be circumvented when he wants to accomplish something, and he counts on ignorance and/or lack of caring on the part of the public about that.
Now comes GOP-nominee-to-be Donald Trump. Trump may or may not actually be ignorant of the Constitution, but in any event he doesn’t seem to care much about most of it and his supporters don’t seem to care. To be more exact about that, many of his supporters used to care but don’t any more because—having experienced nearly eight years of Obama—they want their own strongman to ride roughshod over the Constitution in order to correct what Obama has done. Whether he would actually try to correct it or be able to correct it (not to mention the dangers inherent in the process of his doing it that way) is an open question, but there’s also no question that Hillary Clinton would not even try to correct what Obama has done.
Ted Cruz presented an alternative approach that GOP primary voters rejected. Cruz’s alternative was to undo what Obama did while respecting the Constitution and its restrictions. But that ship has sailed, at least for now. Those who much preferred (understatement of the decade) Ted Cruz and yet will end up voting for Trump in November of 2016 (and I might end up being one of their number) think that if Hillary Clinton is allowed to become president a corrective will never occur, and that with Trump there is at least a small chance of its occurring.
That’s the terrible dilemma we face.
Neo:
“they want their own strongman to ride roughshod over the Constitution in order to correct what Obama has done. Whether he would actually try to correct it or be able to correct it (not to mention the dangers inherent in the process of his doing it that way) is an open question”
What’s not an open question is that Trump-front alt-Right activists seek the social dominance exemplified with the the Democrat-front Left activist difference-making, paradigm-shifting achievements in order to reify the alt-Right preferred social condition.
How much of their social agenda coincides with correcting the Left activist effect in the ways that impotent activism-deficient conservatives and Republicans who are now rationalizing themselves into voting for Trump, rather than mount a 3rd party campaign and social activist movement that competes for real, is an open question.
Well said. It is sort of mind boggling that the American people are so unaware of the Constitution, and so unconcerned about its abuse. I guess there are various reasons for this.
Here is a little story that may illuminate part of the problem Granddaughter just finished freshman year at a private University. Took a comparative religion course. I questioned what she studied. Vodu; Rastifari, and the like. Seems that the Prof spent a good bit of time in the Caribbean, and that is what interested him. No Judaism, no Islam. Wonder what they teach in comparative government?,
Kind of like Obama teaching Constitutional Law.
you really cant think beyond surfaces can you?
connecting with people who dont know the constitution is done by following it and makign them look like ignorants…
you really should read books on how to get people to like you, etc. he is following the books on that, and not the poli sci stuff… so your looking at him with the wrong glasses…
See this article in FastCompany about how to be memorable, and note how many of the tips apply to Donald Trump (creator of dilbert)
Seven Habits Of Memorable People
http://www.fastcompany.com/3059962/how-to-be-a-success-at-everything/seven-habits-of-memorable-people
Being forgettable is the kiss of death for your career. Here’s what memorable people do to stay top of mind.
“[People] will likely forget up to 90% of what you communicate, and that means your brand, your message, your call to action, everything you want your listeners to act on, will be disregarded,” she says. “To be on people’s minds, you must become part of their reflexes, habits and/or goals they consider valuable.”
so being what you want him to be wont work and you wont know him… duh
1. They Use The Power Of Surprise
2. They Appeal To Primal Values
3. They Like To Help Others
4. They’re Willing To Be Contrarian
5. They’re Doers
6. They’re Great Storytellers
7. They Have A Broad And Colorful Vocabulary
they are both following the books and things on this stuff, so yeah, they are going to seem the same
why?
cause the same stuff works on you and others!!!
its not THEM its us.. .
if we really responded to the things you are all chatting about, then he would have been out the first time, and thats that.
but what really irks you is that he is acting not as himself (As i met him and others describe similar) but what works with crowds people, and so on.
women want men to be romantic, so women are not very romantic, they are consumers of romance, not makers of it…
men on the other hand, are romantic not cause they necessarily want to be, but because the woman wants it and if he isnt giving her what she wants, he gets no where
Florence nightingale
[what is victim ideology of feminism other than sympathy on stilts?]
same with the people. even hitler said it.
you confuse giving them what they want and what works with who someone is who does that
wake up..
he is doing what people respond to
and he doesnt have to BE it to DO it
he only has to KNOW it or INTUIT it
if people responded to obama, then copying obama to a degree gives you what? does it mean your like him? no, not necessarily… or not at all… or maybe… no way to know until you taste the cake…
If lust and hate is the candy,
If blood and love taste so sweet,
Then we give ’em what they want.
Hey, hey, give ’em what they want. 10,000 maniacs
catering to others does not require you to be like them
but be sure if you do, they will think you are
neo,
As you well know, it’s not just a case of Hillary not correcting what Obama has done, it’s that she will expand upon their shared agenda and, with the full participation and support of the massive ideological network on the Left, move America further toward the completion of the Left’s agenda. It’s time to contemplate the question of… what comes after the March through the Institutions is finished?
A must-read by Robert Kagan — This is how fascism comes to America . This part is Trump in a nutshell:
Art,
Even if the unprovable proposition, that Trump’s behavior is merely a clever political strategy is entertained, you have yet to offer a reasoned argument demonstrating that Trump would, after being elected, operate at even an acceptable level of performance. How, specifically shall he accomplish what he has promised? How will he get the bipartisan support needed?
As for your low opinion of women, “They cannot state a fact accurately to another, nor can that other attend to it accurately enough for it to become information.” neo posts alone should convince you of the falsity of that slander. Nor is she alone, there are many women who speak intelligently and logically to the issues.
Why would any member of the public younger than 50 respect the Constitution? It’s been hammered into them since grade school that the Constitution is a stale toilet paper written by dead, white. slaveholding males.
‘if Hillary Clinton is allowed to become president a corrective will never occur, and that with Trump there is at least a small chance of its occurring’
No, a corrective cannot possibly occur with Trump. He will pivot left for the general election and then further left if he wins. That’s why principles are so important and why Trump is so predictable. People always act according to their deepest beliefs. His conservative views are fake, even if he doesn’t know it himself. Look at his public statements the years for proof.
OTOH, Hillary is more corrupt which makes her less dangerous precisely because she is more likely to betray her deepest beliefs. Also, she she has no personality cult following her and the Republicans are more likely to stand up to her than they are to Trump because she represents an opposing party.
That’s the terrible dilemma we face.
No dilemma. If Hillary is way out in front, vote 3rd party. If it seems close, vote for her. She cannot possibly do more damage than Obama but Trump can.
‘A must-read by Robert Kagan’
I agree with this except possibly the timeline. Trump is like Julius Caesar, born to pave the way for emperors but not be one himself. It will take a few more years to completely dismantle our constitutional protections and so it won’t be Trump who cashes in but someone (a true fascist) coming later.
Ann,
Trump’s “mobocracy” is not enough. A fascist dictator needs the military at his back. There’s a reason why S. American military coups are so often led by a Colonel. The troops follow their immediate superior’s orders. Obama has done his best to purge the military’s highest echelons of those who place their oath of loyalty to the Constitution above career. But for Trump to become a fascist dictator, he must secure the allegiance of the Colonels… I think that, at this point, unlikely. Hillary, on the other hand will have plenty of time to enable the purge to reach the level of Colonels.
However, I find Robert Kagan’s estimation of Trump preparing the path for later fascism entirely possible.
The fella that you’re think of is SULLA.
He preceded Julius — by generations.
Lucius Cornelius Sulla Felix[1] (/ˈsÊŒlÉ™/; c. 138 BC — 78 BC), known commonly as Sulla, was a Roman general and statesman. He had the distinction of holding the office of consul twice, as well as reviving the dictatorship. Sulla was awarded a grass crown, the most prestigious Roman military honor, during the Social War. Sulla was a skilful general, achieving numerous successes in wars against different opponents, both foreign and Roman. His life was habitually included in the ancient biographical collections of leading generals and politicians, originating in the biographical compendium of famous Romans, published by Marcus Terentius Varro. In Plutarch’s Parallel Lives Sulla is paired with the Spartan general and strategist Lysander.
wiki
“if Hillary Clinton is allowed to become president a corrective will never occur, and that with Trump there is at least a small chance of its occurring.
That’s the terrible dilemma we face.”
That’s how I’ve been seeing it. I’ve been horrified by the Trump uprising, but I think Kagan is overwrought. There’s a very valuable, non-hysterical analysis by David Gelernter in The Weekly Standard (hardly a pro-Trump pub) –
http://www.weeklystandard.com/the-truth-about-trump/article/2002483
BTW, the fellow preparing the way for fascism is Obama. Personality cult, executive edicts and all.
I reached the same conclusion months ago: Trump is Obama without the “polish”. Which is part of the reason I am so turned-off by Trump.
Like many, I was dumbfounded by his success; until I remembered my logic in 2006. I was spending the Winter in Nepal, and was asked one night who would be the next President. My response was: No one has announced yet; but I think the candidate that is the best public speaker will win. I explained that I detested the fact that Bush could not articulate why he was making the decisions he was making. And that that fundamental failure of leadership has created a “hunger”. Most voters will have no awareness of their hunger, and will attribute their support to more conventional reasons (e.g., party supporter). Obama was by far the best public speaker.
We now have another scenario with no incumbent, and after Obama, I thought voters would have a hunger for “competence”. I was wrong (my 1st choice was Walker, never considered any Dem this time). I now believe voters want the best “fighter”. On the R side, many do not want McCain’ “respectfulness”. And they do not want Romney’ “politeness”. They want a bare-knuckle brawler who is willing to attack without hesitation or reservation. Like Obama, like Clinton. On the D side, if Sanders had realized that sooner he would be better off.
I think more voters are actually aware of their “hunger” this time; which is why a “polished veneer” is not required, by either party. And I think the best “fighter” will win in 2016.
They want a bare-knuckle brawler who is willing to attack without hesitation or reservation.
Unfortunately for that demographic, they are too late. The last time the President’s powers could have been used to crush the Left’s insurgency was around 2007.
And Bush II never used any of it to kill domestic traitors or insurgents. Not popular, not allowed, nobody wanted to do it even. It wasn’t necessary to apply COIN in Chicago or Detroit.
Now it is, but it is too late, the Left can’t be stopped from the top of power any more.
Unless Trump is a flaming trainwreck who tars all Republicans with his taint.