His Supporters Have Been Snookered!
By John Lawrence
In a 60 Minutes interview with Leslie Stahl, Trump back pedaled on his major campaign promises and a lot else. When asked what his sit-down with President Obama was like he replied, “I found him [President Obama] to be terrific. I found him to be– very smart and very nice. Great sense of humor, as much as you can have a sense of humor talking about tough subjects, but we were talking about some pretty tough subjects.” So no more questions about his legitimacy to be President? No more wondering whether he was born in Kenya? I guess not now that he, Trump, is a member of the club.
The interview went on:
Donald Trump: We never discussed what was said about each other. I said terrible things about him, he said terrible things about me. We never ever discussed what we said about each other—
Lesley Stahl: There was no awkwardness?
Donald Trump: I’ll be honest, from my standpoint zero, zero. And that’s strange. I’m actually surprised to tell you that. It’s– you know, a little bit strange.
OK. Well whether or not the country has come together it seems like President #45 has come together with President #44. Trump went on to say he respected President Obama.
“No, I think I’m a sober person. I think the press tries to make you into something a little bit different. In my case, a little bit of a wild man. I’m not. I’m actually not. I’m a very sober person. But it was respect for the office, it was respect for the president. Again, I never met him before, but we had– we had a very good chemistry going. And– and I really found—it might not be that I agree with him, but I really found the conversation unbelievably interesting.”
Somewhat different tone than was expected perhaps by his red meat Republican base. Also red meat Republican basers will probably not be getting a heapin’ helpin’ of red meat any more.
Lesley Stahl: Are you going to sometimes have that same rhetoric that you had on the stump? Or are you going to reign it in?
You Need a Certain Rhetoric to Get People Motivated
Donald Trump: Well, sometimes you need a certain rhetoric to get people motivated. I don’t want to be just a little nice monotone character and in many cases I will be.
Lesley Stahl: Can you be?
Donald Trump: Sure I can. I can be easily, that’s easier. Honestly to do that, it’s easier.
So Trump is now going to become a little monotone mouse. He might even start talking like a – God forbid – wishy washy Democrat! What are you red meaters going to do?
But now Leslie Stahl gets to the heart of the interview.
Lesley Stahl: So let’s go through very quickly some of the promises you made and tell us if you’re going to do what you said or you’re going to change it in any way. Are you really going to build a wall?
Donald Trump: Yes.
U.S.-Mexican border fence. (Steve Hillebrand, U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service/Wikimedia Commons)
Lesley Stahl: They’re talking about a fence in the Republican Congress, would you accept a fence?
Donald Trump: For certain areas I would, but certain areas, a wall is more appropriate. I’m very good at this, it’s called construction.
BorderfenceLesley Stahl: So part wall, part fence?
Donald Trump: Yeah, it could be – it could be some fencing.
Oh no…. From a mighty wall, Trump is now considering just a flimsy fence? There’s a fence already there in many places, certainly in San Diego County along the border. You mean this would be acceptable to Trump? But the larger point is that most illegals don’t come over a fence or a wall. They simply come here legally and overstay their visas so all the chanting red meaters (“Build a Wall. Build a Wall”) are going to have to settle for just a fence. What a let-down!
But it gets worse … for the red meaters, that is. Better for the Hillary supporters though.
Trump: “Undocumented Immigrants Are Terrific People”
Lesley Stahl: What about the pledge to deport millions and millions of undocumented immigrants?
Donald Trump: What we are going to do is get the people that are criminal and have criminal records, gang members, drug dealers, we have a lot of these people, probably two million, it could be even three million, we are getting them out of our country or we are going to incarcerate. But we’re getting them out of our country, they’re here illegally. After the border is secured and after everything gets normalized, we’re going to make a determination on the people that you’re talking about who are terrific people, they’re terrific people but we are gonna make a determination at that– But before we make that determination– Lesley, it’s very important, we want to secure our border.
So it’s just a continuation of the Obama policy: deport criminals. Obama has been doing this for years!
From the LA Times: “The Obama administration set a priority in his second term of deporting migrants with criminal convictions, and it has expelled 530,000 convicted criminals since 2013. Since taking office in 2009, Obama has expelled 2.5 million people, more than any other president.”
And then there’s the “people that you’re talking about who are terrific people, they’re terrific people”. They’re not murderers or rapists like the Donald referred to them as before? The people you’re talking about – you mean all those dreamers, all the DACA (Deferred Action for Childhood Arrivals) people, all the people Obama was trying to protect? Is Trump totally backing down on deporting all illegals? If so, bad news for the red meaters. Another campaign promise broken. All of a sudden the 30 million (according to Trump) illegals are “terrific people.” The red meaters’ collective heads must be spinning.
It’s the Republican Same Ol, Same Ol: Lower Taxes on the Wealthy
By Thomas L Hungerford (find the full report here: https://www.fas.org/sgp/crs/misc/R42729.pdf)
But according to the interview one of the things Trump wants to do right away is lowering taxes especially on the wealthy but he won’t say that. Donald Trump, welcome to the Republican club! It’s the thing you and House Speaker Paul Ryan have most in common. It’s the old Republican mantra: lower taxes (on the wealthy). The Trump brand will never be more valuable. By the way how about drilling a few more loopholes in the tax code so all those smart people can take advantage of them and not pay anything at all like Trump evidently did for many years. But we don’t know that for sure because he still hasn’t released his tax returns like all those aspiring Presidential chumps before him. Four years from now the audit will probably still not be finished.
It’s the bottom line for Republicans: lower taxes (on the wealthy) while giving a few pennies to the red meaters. This will drive up the national debt even more to the point where government can be drowned in a bathtub which is their final goal, a goal shared by most Republicans including Grover Norquist. (Grover Norquist Quotes. My goal is to cut government in half in twenty-five years, to get it down to the size where we can drown it in the bathtub.)
So Donald Trump is not so radical after all. Probably he won’t represent the “forgotten people” so much as he will become a traditional Republican and grow his fortune while residing in the White House if Melania can stand the lack of amenities there compared to Trump Tower. She’s already not joining him there at least initially. Probably the servants aren’t as good there as they are at Trump Tower. Like Nancy Reagan before her she’ll probably have to order a whole new set of dishware. Probably couldn’t stand to eat off the same plates as that Kenyan ate off of.
Finally, all the campaign brou ha ha about Hillary – “Lock her up. Lock her up” – and appointing a special prosecutor to look into her alleged crimes, Trump has had nothing but nice things to say about Hillary and even about Bill since his putative election. After all he is now a member of the club that Bill’s in, the club of ex-Presidents, which hopefully he will be in about four years.
Lock Her Up! Lock Her Up!
Oh, how the red meaters are going to be disappointed that Donald Trump is not going to pursue a criminal investigation against “Crooked Hillary.” On Tuesday, November 22, the New York Times reported that Trump so much as said “Nyah, never mind.” How can he let all the nefarious activities of the Clinton Foundation and Hillary’s numerous crimes go unpunished? His rabid supporters are going to be very upset. Trump had said that Hillary’s lies and deception rivaled Watergate.
The New York Times reported:
In an appearance on MSNBC’s “Morning Joe” program, Kellyanne Conway, the former Trump campaign manager and a senior adviser to his transition, said the president-elect wanted to “move beyond the issues of the campaign” and confirmed that Mr. Trump did not want his promised Clinton investigations to take place.
“If Donald Trump can help her heal, then perhaps that’s a good thing,” Ms. Conway said. …
But it could deeply disappoint many of the voters whose anger against Mrs. Clinton he helped stoke throughout a bitter and divisive campaign. During the second debate between the two candidates, Mr. Trump turned to Mrs. Clinton and vowed that “if I win I am going to instruct my attorney general to get a special prosecutor to look into your situation, because there’s never been so many lies, so much deception.”
Now even the FBI is disappointed. Trump was only using this to fire everybody up and now he wants to “help her heal”? What kind of BS is this? All the red meaters want Hillary to rot in jail for her many lies, crimes and deceptions. They want the Clinton Foundation investigated. The FBI still has an ongoing investigation against that. Now Trump is telling them all to just cool it. It was only so much campaign rhetoric. Red meaters – I say again – you’ve been snookered!
Newsflash: Maybe there’s hope for the “lock her up” red meaters after all. Since Hillary’s team has joined Jill Stein’s efforts to do a recount in three battleground states, Trump has changed his tune about helping Hillary heal. He may just have to lock her up after all.
My prediction is that Trump will end up being co-opted by Paul Ryan. He will become a traditional Republican and will end up destroying the Federal government with his tax cuts. Medicare will be privatized with resultant higher costs for Medicare recipients. Public schools will be privatized according to the new Secretary of Education, Betsy DeVos’s, wishes. The military-industrial complex will get everything they want, and this will suck all the air out of any other government programs to help the needy including social security. No good paying jobs will come back from overseas, but a privatized infrastructure program may provide some half way decent, slightly over minimum wage, jobs while contractors and investors will make a fortune. Red meaters will have to be satisfied with that.
John Lawrence
Latest posts by John Lawrence (see all)
- Economist Kenneth Arrow, Nobel Laureate, Dead at 95 - March 22, 2017
- Container Ships Burn Dirtiest Fuel: the International Maritime Organization (IMO) Could Change That - March 15, 2017
- Cities and States Prefer Public Banks To Wall Street - March 7, 2017
Big concept, this argument that the pitchfork racists and abandoned working class will recognise they’ve been fuddled by Trump’s brand of disruption. Where will they go? Let’s hope not back to the Confederacy.
I found the overuse of the term “red-meaters” extremely annoying and redundant. Makes me crave a nice thick juicy T-bone, actually. Condescension is never attractive.
I think I’ve struck a nerve! Red meaters will now be my preferred term for referring to Trump supporters from now on.
Saw this segment of 60 Minutes. What next??
I’m on medicare, and John believes that will go away, only to be replaced by who-knows-what. But whatever it is, I probably will not be able to afford it. So, I’ guess at 70 years old, I’ll have no health insurance. S/S is ~ 1/2 my income now. With that slashed, I may even become homeless as well. Thanks Donald, you ass hole! Drill baby drill and bomb baby bomb! All I can say is he’d better ante up plenty for homeland security to fend off all those crazy Muslim extremists, because for sure he will need it (and we’ll all have to pay for it!).
This stupid, backward country takes 2 hard-earned steps forward and now under the able guidance of one Donald J. Trump, it’s it is about to have a knee-jerk reaction and take ~5 steps backwards. This is utterly predictable since this country totally ignored President Jimmy Carter’s warnings about getting off of oil 40+ years ago. So, we lost 40 precious years in which to do what has to be done. It’s a great country, Amerika.
Can you tell I’m a little p***ed off?
It is hard to understand if the “Never Trump” crowd is happy or sad about “Trump Reneging on His Campaign Promises to Voters”. Or do they feel better by saying we told you so!
Finally, I get a rise out of you, Jim Carey! I think the Never Trump crowd is both happy and “I told you so” about Trump reneging on his promises. Not sad though.
Trump’s promotion of supply-side economics, the “trickle down” theory, was known as the “horse-and-sparrow” theory in the late 19th century. The theory was, “If you feed horses enough oats, it will pass through their digestive systems and their droppings will provide enough leftover oats to feed the sparrows.” In simplistic economic speak by one economist, if the wealthy are fed increasing amounts of tax breaks, they brush more crumbs off the table, feeding those below them.
The “horse-and-sparrow” theory led to panics and bank crises in the 1890s. In the 1920s ending with the crash of 1929, the theory returned with a vengeance under Harding and Coolidge under the name “Mellonomics,” during the ruthless reign of banker and Treasury Secretary Andrew Mellon. The term “trickle down” was first coined by comedian Will Rogers concerning Hoover’s giving out money to the wealthy, hoping it would “trickle down” to the poor. It’s well documented that the Harding/Coolidge policies ended up spawning massive wealth disparity in the 1920s, as was started up again under Reagan’s “trickle-down” economics in the 1980s.
The two-fold problem with ‘Reaganomics’ was first the sharp reduction of taxes that mainly benefited the wealthy, shifting more of the tax load onto the overburdened middle-class. And then this was done WITHOUT cutting spending but actually increasing military outlays significantly. RESULT? Massive Deficits. Federal Debt soared 186% in Reagan’s two terms. He had to restore taxes. In the late 1980s, middle-class incomes were hardly higher than a decade before.
Evidence shows that lowering taxes mainly on the rich just means more wealth concentration and new peaks in CEO bonuses. The idea that “rich money” stimulates the economy is a MYTH. When the rich receive money they simply get richer and save most of that money – while exploiting all the exotic tax avoidance schemes handed them. As a widely cited Oxham report notes, 62 people own the same amount of wealth as half of the world’s population. The message? Trickle-down is a success in assisting the wealthy but doesn’t help the middle-class or the poor.
Fiscal budgets should focus on creating DEMAND by “Bottom-Up” economics, not “Top-Down” economics … and reversing obscene income disparities and working-class income stagnation. Rapid globalization, technology, digitization, robotization are exasperating economic insecurity, the speed and scale of permanent job destruction. Working from the “Bottom-Up” for middle and lower classes in statewide and local partnerships, this decentralized grassroots touch is essential.
Will Trump repeat past “trickle down” financial-cure blunders of spending aggressively on infrastructure, hospitals, education, defense while simultaneously reducing taxes that mainly enrich the already wealthy who spend but a fraction of their tax benefits? The International Monetary Fund found in a study in 2015 that as more money is pushed towards high income earners, economic growth actually slows down.
Independent reports show Trump’s 2017 fiscal budget and spending plans will result in a +-$10 trillion addition to our federal debt over the next decade. This arises in major part from much higher annual interest costs eating up the added tax revenues from GDP growth. Tax losses from the added tax cuts end up not being paid for by added tax gains from GDP growth. Resulting deficits and debt acceleration lead to severe austerity measures the top 10% hardly suffer from; the bottom 90% get hit big time.
Following actions in some form, among others, can reduce potential runaway deficit-debt risks:
– Focus 95% of all net tax cuts on the middle and lower income classes.
– Offset costs of investing in critically needed infrastructure, hospitals, and education improvements by implementing a financial transactions tax; or by another neutral tax idea like progressively limiting the reduction of home mortgage interest; or by a higher tax on cigarettes and/or gasoline; or by other cost saving opportunities than cutting Medicaid or essential social services.
– Eliminate onshore-offshore tax avoidance structures for businesses and the wealthy; make tax reporting vastly more simplified and transparent.
– Phase out all subsidies to oil firms.
– Offer an incentive for U.S. firms to repatriate profits held overseas on condition that the money will be invested in new jobs and worker training.
– Accept the science of human-induced climate change and set aggressive targets and incentives for installing residential and industrial solar energy and developing innovative energy efficiency technology – potentially HUGE job generator markets in coming decades.
You bring up very good points, Frank. They are well-researched.
So why do you suppose such a large number of Americans don’t see it that way?
So many of us are puzzled that, despite the history and economics, half the country does not agree with what you are saying.
Hi Barbara. To the question you raise, I would like to offer a suggestion.
It is to read an article you can find at this link, http://nonsite.org/editorial/listening-to-trump, which was sent to both Frank and myself by a friend of Frank’s, Dimitris Vayenas, the jist of which is that Trump won because people tend to vote with their “gut” instincts, not their intellect.
Intellectually speaking, Frank is absolutely correct. I think Trump won only because change (change most Americans find painful but necessary) is difficult and at this point, after years of struggling for long needed changes, a small majority think they will get some relief from the pain of change in Donald Trump, so they voted for him. Trump, the consummate salesman, convinced enough of them to vote for him by telling them what he sensed they wanted to hear, whether it is true or not. Isn’t that what any good salesman does? Many of us are skeptical whether anyone (of the 90% of us, that is) will actually get any relief as a result of Trump’s being President.
Ooo. Now that’s interesting, although admittedly I only had time to skim it and read the last paragraphs for now. (Hope to return to it tonight.)
That still leaves us with this, however: we are (probably) stuck with Trump. Will Trump supporters change their minds anytime soon?
Are our discussions/articles/erudite research of economics just all for nothing?
Sure this is a great article by John Lawrence. But who does it help or speak to, in the end?
I think this is the existential crisis many of us face right now.
My own thoughts on your question regarding whether Trump’s supporters will change their minds anytime soon, is that their support for him will fade gradually (as it does for many presidents) as he is forced by his opponents (us) into unhappy compromises on several of the various promises he has made, and they realize 1 by 1 that they are not getting the relief they thought they would get when they voted for him. If the opposition keeps pulling for change despite Trump, he will have to negotiate for whatever he can get, or (possibly “and”) get slammed again by the terrorists.
The value in John’s work (Thank you, John) is that he keeps pulling for change, for continued improvement, thus forcing people like Trump to deal with the issues John raises.
Thanks for your thoughts, Barbara.
Paul, thanks for your comments. An interesting point is that Trump supposedly saved 1000 jobs at the Carrier plant in Indiana that were scheduled to be transferred to Mexico. Evidently, Carrier was threatened in terms of their parent company, United Technology, which is a big defense contractor. I’m wondering why Obama couldn’t have done the same thing. If Trump keeps pursuing this kind of policy, he may well save some jobs here in the US.
That is an interesting point, John. I’ve also heard about the issue with UT being a big defense contractor and that he cannot save any of the 300 jobs that a nearby company called Rexnord (or something like that) is also shipping off to Mexico. I’ve also heard that Carrier is going to send those jobs off to Mexico anyway, just not right now presumably so Trump can gloat in his apparent, but illusory victory…gag me with a spoon! If so, then all Trump really got is a delay.
I also heard that Carrier got big tax incentives and other goodies to keep the jobs here.
Trump did all his “hoopbala” to attract voters. Trickle down has never worked and never will I just sincerely wish that he would not keep his promise to down the EPA and deny climate change. We appear to be in deep DODO. Our poor kids and grandkids!
We ARE indeed in deep, deep doodoo, Grace! Trump’s voters have made our collective bed, and now we all must sleep in it!
Oh, ya. There’s nothin’ new here. I thought Trump was supposed to perform some sort of magic or something, and just “bring back those good jobs”, just because he is Donald Trump and he’s the best, don’t ya know? Ya, right. If you believe that, he has some swampland in Florida to sell you too (and I don’t mean his palace down there where he spent Thanksgiving).
Hi Barbara,
Finally, I’m able to get back to you. Sorry for the delay. Paul’s response sums up well my view of why our nation has come to be in such an irrational, divisive political communication fix and destructive polarization – within and between both parties!
The long-held inbred ‘elitist’ nature of our governance and institutions – influenced and corrupted by money interests – has mindlessly angered working-class outsiders who feel marginalized and forced to scramble for an ever dwindling piece of the pie.
A rigged system favoring technical elites has given white (and black) working-class Americans a deep sense of powerlessness and insecurity in the face of globalization, intolerable inequality, rapid technical displacement of jobs, environmental degradation, horrific levels of inequality and poverty, neglected communities, endless wars. Over last four decades, these systemic failures have developed while political power and influence transitioned to special interests and super donors working both outside and inside the party systems. Result? People of both parties distrust their own institutions and media.
Not surprisingly, expectations have descended to a new low for working class Americans in a race to the bottom – job wise, education wise, health care wise. Both political parties missed or ignored the depth of this pain. This opened the door to an egocentric opportunist like Trump. Via internet and the social media, he effectively uses anger, rhetoric, and passion to expand his power and create a cult around his persona. In a kind of fantasy wish, people in turn channel their anger to Trump and set high expectations of him as their savior.
So, a cult of personality has entered our political system. Trump, as an outsider, is not a member of the ‘political elite’ but is a member of the ‘economic elite.’ He is someone whose party will have majority representation in the House, Senate, and Supreme Court, and 70% of all state governors. At same time, Trump represents the politics of emotion, feeling, and narcissism. He may well put at risk whatever small remnant we had of reasoned, balanced deliberation in our political system … despite his promises otherwise.
What is equally disturbing is the big threat of authoritarianism – fed by a tide of anti-establishment rage and a more radicalized Republican party with little respect for differences, evidence, or finding common ground. This would make any Democratic presidential power that has been obstructed at every possible move the last +50 years look like child’s play.
People’s beliefs on the right or left are not going to change easily. The focus on divisions instead of what we have in common, the racism and hatred fomented during the elections and buried deeply in so many is tragic. One primary way to free ourselves from this grip is to come up with a sound plan to generate decent working-class paying jobs, restore communities, insure economic and social stability and set the common good as our nation’s number one priority. Have we got to get this done by a tyrant? I hope not!
_______________________________________________________________________
Some recommended readings or re-readings of past-present-future political, economic, cultural public and party crossfires include:
– “Two Bubbles of Unrealism: Learning From the Tragedy of Trump”, by Bruno Latour, Nov. 17, 2016 (https//lareviewofbooks.org/article/two-bubbles-unrealism-tragedy-trump)
– “America Has Never Been So Ripe for Tyranny,” by Andrew Sullivan, May 1, 2016 (http://nymag.com/daily/intelligencer/2016/04/america-tyranny-donald-trump.html)
– “Our Fiscal-Economic Quagmire: Some Solutions,” by Frank Thomas, Will Blog For Food, July 2011
_______________________________________________________________________