How in the World was Trump Elected?

cuttingstringsby Leigh Bravo11/12/16
A friend recently posted an article by the Wall Street Journal, on Facebook. The article was titled, ” ‘Deplorables’ Rise Up to Reshape America,” written by Gerald Seib. Intrigued, as I have always considered the Wall Street Journal to be a respected publication, I read the article. It was insulting to say the least. Sadly, I tossed my Wall Street Journal in the trash and have cancelled my subscription, and with a sigh admit that there is no honest ‘middle of the road’  journalism left in the United States.

We have all heard the bloviating of every major news station and every mainstream publication, who demonized Trump from the beginning, thinking they understand the reason that he was propelled into the White House. Of course, those of us who jumped into the “deplorables” basket freely with enthusiasm, relieved that someone was finally running for office who understood what was happening to our country, know the REAL REASON Trump won. We should all be asking ourselves why anyone would believe the mainstream media in their post-election frenzy, when they clearly lied, misrepresented the truth, cheated in the debates and flat-out lied to the American people during the entire election process. These same naysayers are now standing up clearly delusional in their belief that only they can predict what he will do when he takes control of the White House and the once most powerful Nation in the world.

Well, here’s a newsflash. They didn’t have clue when he joined the race, they purposefully tried to destroy him when he was winning the race and now they will misrepresent, yet again, what they think will happen to the United States now that he has won. In their infinite stupidity and allegiance to the liberal political elite, they scream racist, homophobe, Islamaphobe, bigot and destroyer of the atmosphere in a continued effort to scare anyone who might agree that we need change. I think, as a self-professed deplorable, I should explain the real reason he won from the point of view of a person who actually voted for him.

Unfortunately, the WSJ article is full of accusations, divisiveness and polarization which is, in fact, the message of the liberal left. A left who demands tolerance, unless of course you disagree with them, which will result in the destruction of  your personal property, the burning of your business or the beating of your life. Trump won the White House because the “majority” of Americans who voted for him….whites, blacks, gays, women, Latinos, immigrants (legal), rich, poor uneducated and educated, white-collar and blue-collar are sick of the lawlessness and the complete disregard for the exceptionalism of the United States and its people. The majority of America falls in the middle, not only in opinions, but in a class of people who believe that hard work, the rule of law and our constitution should be important enough to defend. This majority is tired of being sacrificed at the altar of Wall Street and the political elites through bail outs and stimulus given to the very people who destroyed the economy for their own personal gain in the first place. Crooks who were handed our money, earned by the same hard-working American people, who lost their homes, their jobs, their savings and retirement plans. Our money, given to the same crooks who were allowed to take the millions they stole and continue with their lives while never being punished or held accountable for their illegal manipulation of the housing market in the first place.

This ‘Trump’ majority was tired of hearing Democrats and our President apologize for the very things that made this country great and safe, while throwing anyone, who held this country dear, under the bus. A bus full of politically well-connected politicians, CEO’s and special interests who were purposefully throwing billions of American dollars to the United Nations while they, in their high and mighty, misguided infinite wisdom, want the UN to rule the world. ‘Globalization,’ the new buzz word of the liberal left. A word that ultimately means that the US should be bowing to the altar of the same power-hungry global elites who think they know what is best for the ‘stupid’ Americans. The same elites that want open borders that will eventually make America a place that no longer honors its citizens or puts them first.  If they could fool us in to handing over our democratic society, then who else in the world would dare question their intentions. The United States is a great nation and one that has served as a beacon of freedom to the majority of the world. A country that offers liberty, freedom of speech and religion without fear of persecution. A country where hard work will reap great success. A country where millions will place their money and their lives on the line, in order to be called an American citizen. However, ignoring the immigrants  who have lined up for years to become a part of this great nation, our political elite give ambassadorships, visas and passports to anyone who will write a check to their favorite charity….them. They chastise anyone who disagrees with allowing unvetted refugees, who have already committed mass murder as a thank you to those who have opened their borders, to overtake our nation by calling us racists instead of realists.

Meanwhile here at home, the liberal left, in their misguided self-professed wisdom decided to fundamentally change our great Nation. They took over our healthcare, promising lies of affordability, while knowing from the beginning that a single payer system was the ultimate prize. Our education system, taken over by government, is infiltrated with liberal professors and educators who slowly but surely poison the minds of our future generations. They begin by destroying the integrity of the our nation and then follow-up with altering our actual history to suit their twisted agenda of eventually controlling the masses.  Dumb down the youth of today so they can control the adults of tomorrow.  Now, their successful infiltration of the education system has resulted in a generation who think they are entitled to everything without lifting a finger. A generation who was congratulated and handed trophies in their youth for doing nothing. A generation who is so spoiled and uninformed that they demean the very people who fought for and died for their rights to insult our country and burn our flag without retribution. The same generation who, under the protection of democracy, burn their communities and destroy local businesses because they didn’t get their way. Riots and destruction funded by the liberal elites who use the youth to do the dirty work so they can continue to pretend outrage.  The same generation who cheer the corrupt political elite who have weaponized our government agencies and used them to attack and destroy anyone who dare call out their destructive agendas. A generation who cannot recognize how they are being used by the left to seal a future for the United States that gives the well-connected and the elites more power and more money while the rest of us are sacrificed to the altar of globalism.

Yes, Donald Trump was elected and has, by the wish of the majority of the people, separated himself from the old Republican party and the Democrats, by standing up for life, liberty and the right of every American to pursue happiness without the interference of a bloated, misguided, noninclusive government, who has forgotten its place.  Trump, though the power of the people, will put our government back where it belongs….a government of the people, for the people and by the people.


Leigh Bravo blogs at The Trumpet. • (1203 views)

Share
This entry was posted in Politics. Bookmark the permalink.

27 Responses to How in the World was Trump Elected?

  1. Brad Nelson Brad Nelson says:

    A friend of mine sums it up by saying, “Trump is the American Brexit.” The gist of his narrative is that Trump is a triumph over the elite and in a way that is big and will be, or is part of, a world wide phenomenon.

    Frankly, I think we’ll be lucky if Trump’s attention span and influence last 100 days in which he signs a number Executive Orders and generally gives a shot in the arm to industry.

    But it’s hard to be a phenomenon when, according to stats I’ve read, 61% of people polled thought Trump wasn’t qualified to be president.

    Who knows what is to come? My caution is to lower your expectations and beware of projecting onto Trump either one’s dreams or grievances.

    What we’ll likely see is Trump figuratively shooting people in the streets and his supporters continuing to support him. We have all likely been conned. Or, at the very least, we’re going to find out once and for all if “fiscally conservative” can coexist with “socially liberal,” which Trump and his family very much are.

    Whatever the case may be, Trump represents a new normal. I find it abnormal. Others don’t. Thus it is SNAFU.

    • SkepticalCynic SkepticalCynic says:

      Say what you will about Donald Trump but after the fiasco of eight years of Obama, a person of doubtful citizenship, Muslim indoctrination, limited experience in life, an instigator of divisiveness and an impulsive liar … WHO short of Satan himself wouldn’t be an improvement as the leader of America?

      That our Congress is so stupid and weak they could not impeach his clear violations of our U.S. Constitution is tantamount to them needing to be impeached themselves.

      You may not like Mr. Trump, nor may I but the next four years will surely be more interesting than the last eight.

      • Brad Nelson Brad Nelson says:

        Cynic, it’s not a matter of me liking Trump or not from a purely personal standpoint. The point will be, now that ding-dong the witch is exiled, what he will do. I hope he does good. I hope he holds himself to the standards of his own show, The Apprentice. And even then, I’ll be grading on a very generous curve considering what we could have had.

        What I won’t do is play pretend. I won’t drink kool-aid. And I won’t let grievance or angst regarding Hillary (or anyone else) cloud my judgment in regards to what Trump and the Republicans are doing or aren’t doing.

        As I was just telling a friend, we need to smarten up a little and gain some of our depth back. The extent of the “intellectual” argument of the Left is that if you don’t agree with them then you’re a sexist, homophobe, racist, etc. I fear that we’ll just have the same on our side, but now if you oppose something Trump is doing I think it’s likely the Trumpkins will accuse you of being a “globalist.”

        I’m not going to sit back and smile at this hysteria and foolishness on either side. And if we are going to move leftward, let’s just be honest about it. But wouldn’t it be great if The Donald, through his actions, would allay my fears?

        We’ll have to wait and see. I just doubt there will be much objective “seeing” when the time comes.

        And why they hell do you have “skeptical” and “cynic” in your name? Seems to me, I’m the one playing that part. 😉

      • Kung Fu Zu Kung Fu Zu says:

        the next four years will surely be more interesting than the last eight.

        I hope they are considerably less interesting than the last eight and more productive in moving the country back in the right direction.

        I could use a little less excitement and more steady plodding back to the Constitution.

  2. NAHALKIDES NAHALKIDES says:

    The Wall Street Journal has been quite hopeless for some time, I’m afraid. The process of separating Establishment from Conservative is an ongoing high-priority item we neglect at our peril, but the WSJ revealed its true colors a long time ago with its support of open borders and “free trade”.

    Leigh, you did a good job of outlining what the Left has done to this poor country and why Trump was elected. But I think we must be careful of expecting too much from Trump. He means to do well and we can hope he’ll provide us some breathing space at least. But there is no way he’s going to seriously tackle the budget deficit, for instance, although it should decline under his administration, because he’s certainly not the man to begin dismantling the welfare state.

    With Obamacare, he’s already talking about retaining the Pre-existing Condition Mandate, not realizing (as many people don’t) that it is this mandate that leads directly to the hated Individual Mandate. (If people don’t have to buy insurance until they’re sick, which is what the first mandate says, then you destroy the insurance market. The correct solution is to get rid of the mandate, but to statists the answer is to compel people to buy “insurance” at the point of a gun). So we may hope that most but not all of the shackles of Obamacare will be removed, and unless other government controls are repealed as well, we will see the ratchet effect in action: Democrats pass Obamacare and Republicans repeal part of it, leaving the nation further to the Left than it was.

    But if Trump does forge ahead on immigration by revoking Obama’s illegal orders and building the wall, and if he also gets the government’s boot off industry’s neck, we’ll definitely see some economic improvement in this country, and get that breathing space we so much need. We must use it wisely, seeing to it that no Amnesty sneaks through under another name, and that mass immigration is greatly reduced, and that a big de-regulation campaign is undertaken, while continuing to fight the culture war. That is the only path I can see that leads to ultimate victory. It won’t happen under Trump’s term in office, but he just might go down in history as the President who began to turn things around.

    • Timothy Lane says:

      Note that the 2 parts of Obamacare that Trump talks of keeping are both very popular (because people don’t understand that everything has a price), and so naturally have strong support from congressional Republicans. If we just had someone who could explain the connection between the pre-existing conditions rule and the individual mandate . . .

    • Brad Nelson Brad Nelson says:

      The Wall Street Journal has been quite hopeless for some time, I’m afraid. The process of separating Establishment from Conservative is an ongoing high-priority item we neglect at our peril, but the WSJ revealed its true colors a long time ago with its support of open borders and “free trade”.

      Nik, you’ve sort of made it a speciality to note what other conservative sites/press are doing wrong (as have I). This being a non-profit site, we don’t belong to anyone. That’s not necessarily good or bad. It is what it is.

      We are certainly in a position where we needn’t automatically apologize for Establishment Republicans because of who funds us. Even Ted Cruz (perhaps especially Ted Cruz) is driven by money. If only the man were driven a little more by his gut, he might be president-elect right now. But he was too careful and too clever by half at times.

      For better or for worse, Trump captured enough of the anti-Hillary, pro-bubba (aka “Reagan Democrat”) support to become president. The one journalist I gained some respect back for was Jonah Goldberg who, in essence, said that his job was to state the truth, as he saw it, not stick his finger in the air and see which way the wind was blowing. (But I’m not holding my breath in regards to his sticking his finger in the air to see which way the gay marriage wind was blowing.) He, and others like him, had abuse heaped onto him for simply stating that running a horse’s ass for president might be a bad idea.

      And neither is it our job to drink populist kool-aid. I think the importance of the conservative press is way overblown. We are, for the most part, in our own little bubble. One reason for the new standards regarding purely political articles is that I would like us to break out of this bubble.

      But I don’t, offhand, begrudge the Wall Street Journal to pursue whatever they think the interests of the Wall Street Journal are. All I ask is that people be honest about it. If one of the drones in the mainstream media would come out and say something like, “We report the news in a way that is favorable to Democrats and unfavorable to Republicans because we side the with Democrats,” I could at least respect them. I would disagree with their support, but I could respect their honesty.

      The problem is, dishonesty abounds in the press, left or right. And I’m not so naive to think “non-profit” is automatically the lens to see truth. Nor do I think even if it was that we could make one diddly of difference in a world gone mad…or at least driven by very strange things as times. But what I won’t be a part of is kool-aid.

      Let’s give Trump a chance. It won’t be that long until he takes office. It will be less time still before he starts announcing some of his cabinet nominees and other top appointments. We can hope we do not see a single Harriet Miers and see a lot of Clarence Thomases and such, figuratively speaking. Many of the names for top posts might not be familiar to us. This thus emphasizes all the more the need for less kool-aid and more objective reporting. There will be surely many names offered for some top posts who will be relative strangers to me. I don’t have a say in any of this, of course. But I have an interest as a citizen of these great United States. Wouldn’t it be great if the conservative press did something the liberal press doesn’t do and is objective? Or, if they are not objective, to at least state their biases and interests honestly.

      • Timothy Lane says:

        Reince Priebus has been named Chief if Staff and Steve Bannon (of Breitbart, the final campaign CEO) top counsel. So far he seems to be rewarding loyalty, but he will need to go beyond that group in the end.

        • Kung Fu Zu Kung Fu Zu says:

          That is why I am pleased that Pence is running the transition team. There are about 4,000 positions which need to be filled and once Trump’s small group of loyalists are rewarded, Pence should be able to appoint conservatives all the way down the line. At least one can hope he does.

        • Brad Nelson Brad Nelson says:

          Speaking of Rinse Pillbus, Michael Savage says he’s everything the voters rejected.

          One suspects that Pillbus is an excellent ass-kisser. More than that, I suspect he and Trump share a similar hatred for conservatives.

          • Timothy Lane says:

            Priebus was party chair in Wisconsin, which turned the tide last Tuesday. (My biggest moment of really cheering came when they projected Ron Johnson’s victory. Of course, Toomey and Blunt weren’t called until after I went to bed.) The Wisconsin party isn’t perfect, but their candidates are conservatives.

            • Brad Nelson Brad Nelson says:

              There is a shared ideology of power, that’s for sure. That, and wanting to beat Hillary, pushed a lot of opportunists (including Palin…a natural populist, I guess) into Trump’s camp. Give them credit because had they lost, that would have stuck to them for some time. And still may.

        • Kung Fu Zu Kung Fu Zu says:

          I suspect Priebus is the consummate ass-kisser. I doubt very seriously that he has an overriding philosophy other than doing his master’s bidding, thereby gaining power. And Trump has been master since winning the primaries.

          He is Trump’s Cromwell.

    • Kung Fu Zu Kung Fu Zu says:

      But I think we must be careful of expecting too much from Trump.

      Couldn’t agree more with you Nik. Given the effusiveness of their writings, too many of his followers seem to believe the man can walk on water. This level of hero-worship is not very healthy. Will these people turn on him when he cannot do a quarter of what he promised?

  3. Brad Nelson Brad Nelson says:

    Dumb down the youth of today so they can control the adults of tomorrow.

    I just want to point out that we have just elected a reality TV star to the presidency. It’s not altogether clear that we “populists” are not just Bernie Sanders voters with a slightly different spin on it.

    I hope Trump and his administration do a good job. But the reality is that if Hillary and her party were given a rebuke, so was conservatism and Constitutionalism. Trump shows every sign of governing as a “strong man” when arguably “draining the swamp” should mean re-instituting Constitutional government (especially in terms of limits), and especially including reducing it’s power and reach. That almost certainly won’t happen.

    That said, it’s arguable that merely reversing a few of Obama’s executive orders regarding environmental wacko-ism could spawn tremendous economic growth — which can be the only measure of a Trump presidency because he did not overtly run on any kind of ideology. And a good Supreme Court nomination and confirmation could certainly go a long ways in terms of a positive legacy and Constitutional reform. Again, that will be in the column of IBIWISI (not sure how to pronounce that acronym, but it means “I’ll believe it when I see it”).

    But if the Left’s worldview was left in tatters (it wasn’t…once again regarding a national presidential race, in no way was the Progressive world view on trial in this election), then the right’s worldview is also in tatters with a Trump presidency, at least in terms of that world view being anchored in the idea that a coherent political philosophy matters, as does personal conduct. For instance, the question of whether or not there should be socialized medicine has been decided. It’s now only a matter of what kind.

    So, who really is winning? I remain skeptical, as should you, of anyone who gains office as a “populist” because a “populist” inherently means playing to the passions and grievances of the people instead of offering leadership around a more specific agenda. We have handed Trump a blank check. No one should be surprised if a few of these checks bounce, particularly leftward.

  4. Kung Fu Zu Kung Fu Zu says:

    Drudge has put together a video of media types and politicians who sneered at Trump and make a declarative statement, “Donald Trump is not going to be president.” It is hilarious. I suggest you go to Drudge.com and view it before they take it down. It is about 3 minutes long.

    • Brad Nelson Brad Nelson says:

      He isn’t there yet! There’s plenty of time for the Democrats to find enough dead people.

      But seriously, there is a lot of “having the last laugh” that the classless Trumpkins have their right to crow about.

      But is was a reasonable expectation that this bizarre man could never make it to the top. Never has there been a more vulgar and classless man to grace the office, at least in my lifetime. His demeanor was so bizarre, it was prima facie silly for any reasonable person to imagine him as a serious candidate.

      But considering we are not a serious culture, I guess that meshed just fine. That said, the way he won (being sort of a classless clown who broke most of the rules), he’s in a unique position (not since Washington, one would presume) to set some new precedents and do things heretofore unimaginable in the girly little pea brains of Establishment Republicans. Will he? Or will he waste his time tiling at windmills?

      • Timothy Lane says:

        For that matter, one of those dead people could be Trump himself. “Where is Lee Harvey Oswald now that we need him?” Liberals no longer see the need to wait for an overt act.

      • Kung Fu Zu Kung Fu Zu says:

        But the video was still funny.

        I must confess, just seeing these people look like the jackasses they are makes me a little happy he won. Schadenfreude is not such a bad thing when aimed at Left.

        • Brad Nelson Brad Nelson says:

          Oh, I liked the video. Nothing sweeter than seeing a no-talent community organizer turn his nose up at man who has actually built something. B. Hussein Obama has built nothing but a house of cards. Go Trump!!

          Okay, just dicking with you. I haven’t turned into a Trumpkin. Really.

  5. Kung Fu Zu Kung Fu Zu says:

    Here is a list of actions Trump said he will follow once he is sworn in.

    http://dailycaller.com/2016/10/23/trumps-seven-point-plan-to-draintheswamp/

    If he can pull off a quarter of these, he will have done the nation a great service. Let’s hope he follows through.

    • Brad Nelson Brad Nelson says:

      Here’s my assessment of that:

      1) Nice window dressing, but amending the Constitution is difficult in the best of times. Getting the cooperation of politicians (which, I believe, is functionally necessary to some extent) regarding an amendment to limit their power faces heavy odds. I put this one down in the category of pandering.

      2) Good, as far as that goes.

      3) I doubt this came from Trump. This is an old nostrum such as “reduce fraud and waste” as a means of reducing government. It’s just more window dressing. Pandering.

      4) Better to reduce the number of officials in the first place (which point #2 somewhat addresses), but another bit of window dressing. The problem isn’t lobbyists, per se. It’s that government is go big and hands out so much money and favors that all are required to play the game. Point #4 is either more pandering or just shows Trump’s basic ignorance.

      5) Fine, but I see this as more non-substantial pandering. This isn’t draining the swamp. This is more like putting up a sign in front of the swamp that says “The swamp is now safe.”

      6) Ditto. Again, not a bad idea unto itself. But this is not really the problem. It’s more of a symptom.

      7) Yep. This is the only point on the list, other than #2, that doesn’t seem disingenuous.

      Legislative measures:

      Middle Class Tax Relief: Where is the reflection of point # 3 above? Shouldn’t there be two dollars of government reduction for every one dollar of tax relief? Again, nothing new here. More boilerplate from the RINO Establishment. Simply promising people “free stuff,” even if in the form of lower taxes, ignores the problem of debt and spending. The only point here that exites me as one not consisting of boilerplate muddle, and that is lifting the restrictions on American energy. That’s also a tax break and job-producer right there (and a great example of the philosophy of getting government the hell out of the way…Reaganomics, if you will).

      End the Offshore Act: Might be useful. But without addressing some of the core reasons that companies are relocating jobs to other countries, it will do what most tariffs tend to do: kill jobs and the economy. This is the aspect of Trumpism that is worrisome. Apparently the guy doesn’t know the first thing about either his country or economics.

      America Energy & Infrastructure Act: The weasel-words here are “revenue-neutral” and “public-private partnerships.” Sounds as if Trump is indeed FDR (some say Teddy Roosevelt) with his mind for Big Projects. The “public-private” thing and “revenue neutral” are terms to try to hide this fact.

      School Choice Act: Yes, but it’s unclear if the Federal government has the power to override the wishes of the individual states. And shouldn’t we abolish the Dept. of Education instead of piling on new Federal mandates? But then this is the difference between conservatism and Big Government. Yes, in the hands of someone who isn’t an America-hating Alinskyite, it can be less oppressive, perhaps even be made at times to work for the good. But no one should have any illusions about Trump dismantling this great beast “for the people.” Not gonna happen. The Beast will still be in place for the next demagogue.

      Obamacare: Yes, rip it out by the roots. Maybe health saving accounts is the best socialist option.

      Affordable Childcare and Eldercare Act: Ooo…the dream of the Left is the state taking care of children. In modern parlance, it now desires to merely control industry to do so instead of the old-fashioned Marxist notion that it must own it. This is wonderful news, truth be told, for Hillary and her ilk. Go Trump! Drain the swamp! And here are further initiatives for the state to cover us from cradle to grave with Eldercare. Go Trump! Drain the swamp!

      Illegal Immigration Act: I love the idea of kicking out the 3 to 4 million illegal immigrants who have had run-ins with the law, just as a starter. And all these proposed new laws may be wonderful. The problem is, we need only enforce the laws that are on the books now. To me, this is just more RINO pandering to the masses. “We’ll pass some new law, and then things will be set straight.” But all Trump has to do is enforce existing law.

      Restoring Crime: Oh boy, oh boy, oh boy. The FDR-ian alphabet soup of new agencies begins as a “task force” is tasked with thinking about what to do about crime. I have little doubt that law enforcement agencies all across the country are not being hamstrung by a lack of funs but by various forms of political correctness. Again, we see RINOism in action, the belief that merely throwing money at something will fix it. Or is that actually liberalism?

      Restoring National Security Act: I’m all for a strong military. The devil, of course, is in the details. Throwing money at it won’t necessarily make it better. And it matters very much how and where it is used.

      Clean-up Corruption in Washington Act: A pandering utopian scheme if ever there was one. The essential problem of corruption in Washington is that it launders so damn much public money to begin with. Reduce the power and scope of Washington and you automatically reduce the corruption. This “act” is just more of the kind of “reduce waste and fraud” pandering that sounds good but accomplishes little.

      But, in agreement with Mr. Kung, if he can accomplish just a couple of these things, that would be better than nothing.

Leave a Reply

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *