Ever since Donald Trump has risen in the ranks of political popularity, I've been fascinated by the strong support he receives. At first, I was like many other left-leaning people and thought his 15-seconds of fame in the presidential spotlight would quickly fade from public consciousness. Trump has been trying to get his name in runs for the White House since the 1980's. He's never been thought of as a serious contender, but now, for some freakish reason, Trump's name association with President of the United States of America has not quit.
Why does such an offensive man have the most support in one of only two political parties? Could Donald Trump's support be an indicator of something seriously wrong with American society?
The list of people Trump's anger and ridicule has been directed at could fill pages. It's unfortunate that his targets aren't tabloid fodder anymore, like when he called Rosie O'Donnell a "fat pig". The targets seem to have extended to anyone in Trump's path. Millions of immigrants should be deported and ripped from their families; women like Megan Kelley are debased when crude references are used towards her vagina; the Pope was referred to as "disgraceful" when he commented on how it's unchristian to build a wall instead of building bridges; an entire religion should be discriminated against and not be allowed to enter the country; and Syrian refugees should not be allowed asylum from a government that has killed thousands of its citizens, including women and children.
When people are asked to explain why they like Trump, they typically talk about how appealing his strength is and that he tells it like it is. What worries me is that so many Americans are falling for the shadows of strength and understanding he offers. It doesn't take strength to give knee-jerk assessments of serious political issues that affects the livelihoods of millions of people.
What Trump's support tells me is that many Americans are so frustrated and scared for the future that they can't even think straight. We live in a time, where nothing is shocking anymore. We've seen kindergarten children gunned down, imminent threats of exotic viruses, major buildings successfully targeted by terrorists, and many more events that were once things only read about.
Donald Trump is monopolizing on the fear and uncertainty our now volatile global world brings. His black-and-white views on complicated issues are comforting, when no other solutions are being offered up. I believe Trump's popularity is a testament not to any real leadership ability on his part, but to how American government has struggled to lead in recent decades.
Monday, March 7, 2016
Tuesday, February 23, 2016
A little bit of politics
America is in the midst of the presidential primary season, and the race between the two democratic candidates is heating up. Former Secretary of State Hillary Clinton is once again fighting for her parties' nomination, and she's getting a run for her money from a self-proclaimed democratic socialist. Vermont Senator Bernie Sanders has gained a substantial following with his vocal views on campaign finance reform, wall street, and healthcare.
Senator Sanders' unapologetic opinions speaks to a generation of Americans as frustrated with government as Donald Trump's bigoted supporters. He talks with passionate distaste for the wealthiest one-percent population and says he's the best candidate to turn America around, but is he really?
I find it amusing that Sander's healthcare reform proposal comes directly from Hillary Clinton. Clinton outlined universal healthcare and exactly how it could be paid for in the 1980's, when she was first lady. The plan was never accepted in much the same way Clinton's assertive attitude for a first lady was never accepted. Sanders would like the youth of America to believe that a simple tax-hike would reduce everyone's healthcare bills by $5000. If this was the case, I'm sure it would have been already done.
Our country, our world, our economy, and our healthcare system is complex and different than it was in even the 1980's. Sanders should realize our government doesn't work as simple as he's proclaiming, and should take his own advice when he flippantly said to Mrs. Clinton, "You're not in the White House yet Madam Secretary."
I also find it sad that more millennial women support Sanders over Clinton. The fact that we still don't have one woman president says a lot about our society. It's the same misogynistic culture that supports a man like Trump, who publicly berates women. It's the same culture that blames a girl for drinking too much or going out with the wrong guy, when she gets raped.
As a woman, Clinton would be able to speak for women's rights and the disenfranchised black community. A white man from Vermont can never relate to the very real socioeconomic disadvantages our society places on minorities, and women are a part of this minority. If we were not, we would have equal pay for the same work a man does, and we would have paid-family leave. What kind of a cruel joke is being played, when a woman's biological nature to bear children is used against her in the working world?
It's the same world that thinks it's okay to bash Hillary Clinton for campaign contributions every other candidate before her took. Bravo to Senator Sanders for not taking any Political Action Committee money, but his campaign has raised close to ten million dollars. Clinton has raised nearly the exact same amount, and just because some came from JP Morgan doesn't mean she's in their pocket. It means JP Morgan may have an interest in keeping someone like Sanders, who wants to tear down Wall Street, out of office. Wall Street is yet another way Sanders should be realistic. No one on the democratic side thinks the big banks don't need to be reformed, but as fragile as world markets have been, a full-fledged dismantling may not be wise.
When it comes down to it, democrats need someone who can win against the propaganda Trump constantly spews out. Could a radical like Sanders win against another radical like Trump? It won't give moderates, who most Americans identify with, much of a choice. Poor choices is what makes poor voter turn-out, which could lead to this guy being elected:
Senator Sanders' unapologetic opinions speaks to a generation of Americans as frustrated with government as Donald Trump's bigoted supporters. He talks with passionate distaste for the wealthiest one-percent population and says he's the best candidate to turn America around, but is he really?
I find it amusing that Sander's healthcare reform proposal comes directly from Hillary Clinton. Clinton outlined universal healthcare and exactly how it could be paid for in the 1980's, when she was first lady. The plan was never accepted in much the same way Clinton's assertive attitude for a first lady was never accepted. Sanders would like the youth of America to believe that a simple tax-hike would reduce everyone's healthcare bills by $5000. If this was the case, I'm sure it would have been already done.
Our country, our world, our economy, and our healthcare system is complex and different than it was in even the 1980's. Sanders should realize our government doesn't work as simple as he's proclaiming, and should take his own advice when he flippantly said to Mrs. Clinton, "You're not in the White House yet Madam Secretary."
I also find it sad that more millennial women support Sanders over Clinton. The fact that we still don't have one woman president says a lot about our society. It's the same misogynistic culture that supports a man like Trump, who publicly berates women. It's the same culture that blames a girl for drinking too much or going out with the wrong guy, when she gets raped.
As a woman, Clinton would be able to speak for women's rights and the disenfranchised black community. A white man from Vermont can never relate to the very real socioeconomic disadvantages our society places on minorities, and women are a part of this minority. If we were not, we would have equal pay for the same work a man does, and we would have paid-family leave. What kind of a cruel joke is being played, when a woman's biological nature to bear children is used against her in the working world?
It's the same world that thinks it's okay to bash Hillary Clinton for campaign contributions every other candidate before her took. Bravo to Senator Sanders for not taking any Political Action Committee money, but his campaign has raised close to ten million dollars. Clinton has raised nearly the exact same amount, and just because some came from JP Morgan doesn't mean she's in their pocket. It means JP Morgan may have an interest in keeping someone like Sanders, who wants to tear down Wall Street, out of office. Wall Street is yet another way Sanders should be realistic. No one on the democratic side thinks the big banks don't need to be reformed, but as fragile as world markets have been, a full-fledged dismantling may not be wise.
When it comes down to it, democrats need someone who can win against the propaganda Trump constantly spews out. Could a radical like Sanders win against another radical like Trump? It won't give moderates, who most Americans identify with, much of a choice. Poor choices is what makes poor voter turn-out, which could lead to this guy being elected:
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)