All That Political Jazz

[billroper]

It strikes me that the Trump and Sanders movements are both fueled by the same sentiments, just manifesting themselves on different sides of the political spectrum:

The government is being run for the benefit of well-connected individuals.

The government is surely not being run for my benefit.

The other candidates have some severe flaws.

Dear God, not another Clinton or Bush!

Personally, I agree with at least 3.5 of the statements above. (That would include all of the fourth one, just for reference.) I don't believe that either Trump or Sanders is the solution, but I certainly sympathize with people who have had quite enough of this, thank you very much...

Comments

[madfilkentist]

Another similarity is that they both have strong anti-immigrant positions.

[billroper]

That, I would think, would relate to points one and two: there is a general perception that loose immigration is primarily of benefit to the wealthy and well-connected while it depresses wages and eliminates jobs that would otherwise be filled by voters. The old phrase about "jobs that Americans aren't willing to do" loses some of its zing when applied to the situation at Southern California Edison or Disney where American employees were replaced with H1-B workers who they had to train in some cases.

[capplor.livejournal.com]

I tend to agree with you about this. I don't think that illegal immigration is as much a problem as the shipping off-shore of our jobs, but I do see what I feel is too much importing of cheap labor done in a supposedly legal manner. I'm also not certain that Sanders or Trump are the answers we need at this time, but anyone who might be is probably too smart to run for a public office. Anyone who wants the job is, by definition, not qualified to have it.

That said, of all of the people out there waving their arms around trying to get noticed a full year & a quarter before the election I, so far, & this is subject to change, might feel a bit better with Sanders. Not because he's so good, but his record *seems* to be one of principle before politics.

I just wish that his principles were what the country & the world needs right now.

My issue with Trump is, in part, what some are touting as one of his virtues. He's a businessman. So were Harding, Hoover, Carter & Bush; look at their records lately? Not very promising in my estimation.

When the time comes I really don't know for whom I shall vote, I will do that research as we approach the primaries & see who's fallen by the wayside. I just know that I cannot, in anything resembling honesty, vote for someone who says "deport them all, and build a wall behind them." The Soviet Union did that & look at how well it worked for them.

[qnofhrt.livejournal.com]

I just know that I cannot, in anything resembling honesty, vote for someone who says "deport them all, and build a wall behind them."

Yep. My SIL posted something on FB that had as a part of it, "Close the borders" I personally don't want to live in a country sized equivalent of East Berlin. It's not feasible in this day and age - given the size of the borders in the US, I doubt it ever was.

I like much of what Sanders says but I'm not sure somebody who uses the word "Socialist" to describe themselves has national electability. I don't have a problem with it because I understand what that term means in this context. The people on the far right to label Obama a socialist, fascist, communist and a Nazi will not because they have no idea of what those terms mean. (Nor do they understand they're mutually exclusive.)

[capplor.livejournal.com]

Sanders described "Socialist" as "looking out for each other." A definition that I, a more political animal than I wish to be, can accept. Mussolini, the guy who pretty much founded Fascism, described that system as "the government being run to benefit industry, not people." (think rampant capitalism with the state's support) Nazism is essentially Fascism with a racist element. (which makes calling Obama a Nazi rather disingenuous) And Communism is, at least in theory, Libertarian socialism. In practice it's more like "authoritarian factory state is god."

Obama is a pragmatist, which means he will use what he needs to get his job, as he sees it, done. Whether you agree or disagree with the man is essentially irrelevant anymore. But calling anyone names just because you don't like him is petty. (So please don't ask me about W.)

And I believe that you meant West Berlin, since that was the part of the city which was entirely surrounded by walls, except for three roads leading to the rest of West Germany.

[madfilkentist]

"Fascist" and "Nazi," in their contemporary usage, certainly aren't mutually exclusive. If you're talking about capital-F Fascism, it applies only to Mussolini's government in Italy, but people discussing contemporary politics aren't using it in that sense. In its broader sense — a strong central government with control over all aspects of life, nominal private property constrained to follow the goals of the state, and highly restricted civil liberties, Nazism is widely recognized as one of the forms of fascism.

Nazism, Fascism, and Communism (regarded as proper names) all described themselves as forms of socialism, all being ways of subordinating individual, private interests to the alleged interest of society.

[tigertoy.livejournal.com]

I think you're spot on that a lot of people out there think that things are too screwed up for any mainstream candidate to fix. When we get down into details of exactly how things are screwed up, then we lose that illusion of consensus.

Another thing they have in common is that if either one got the nomination, it would throw the election to the other party. (And what on earth would happen if they both got nominated?)

[archangelbeth]

There would be a run on. ALL. THE. POPCORN.

>_>