Orange is the new President

User avatar
Eric the .5b
Posts: 14907
Joined: 26 Apr 2010, 16:29

Re: Orange is the new President

Post by Eric the .5b »

Jadagul wrote:
09 Dec 2019, 16:24
(Before you try to use Trump as a counterexample, he was viewed as quite moderate during the 2016 election. On average people thought he was more moderate than they thought Clinton was.)
"Was viewed" by who?
"Better that ten guilty persons escape than that one innocent suffer."
Cet animal est très méchant / Quand on l'attaque il se défend.

User avatar
Jadagul
Posts: 7561
Joined: 26 Apr 2010, 18:51

Re: Orange is the new President

Post by Jadagul »

Eric the .5b wrote:
09 Dec 2019, 16:40
Jadagul wrote:
09 Dec 2019, 16:24
(Before you try to use Trump as a counterexample, he was viewed as quite moderate during the 2016 election. On average people thought he was more moderate than they thought Clinton was.)
"Was viewed" by who?
Voters.

FiveThirtyEight had a roundup on this back in November 2016. (They've written a more recent piece on how this has shifted).

But you can also go back and look at some of the actual polling. In that poll (which is only one poll but I don't think is an outlier) they have 47% of people rating Trump as conservative, 22% as moderate, and 19% as liberal. The same poll has 58% of people rating Clinton as liberal, 25% as moderate, and 12% as conservative.

Yglesias wrote this piece on how this made some sort of sense. Trump ran on protecting Medicare and Social Security and Medicaid. He criticized Bush's Iraq policy. And he aggressively racheted down anti-gay rhertoric. None of this has really been all that reflected in his governing, which is probably why the numbers have shifted and he's now viewed as quite conservative. But during 2016 he as by and large viewed as relatively moderate.

User avatar
thoreau
Posts: 30046
Joined: 06 May 2010, 12:56
Location: Back to the lab again

Re: Orange is the new President

Post by thoreau »

Eric the .5b wrote:
09 Dec 2019, 16:38
thoreau wrote:
09 Dec 2019, 11:14
And they say that I'm the crazy one who sees this all as an 11-dimensional chess game.
Sorry, I'm behind on the drama. Who's saying this about your view of the Team Blue campaigns?
Nobody was saying that about my view of Team Blue campaigns. They were saying that I think Putin is a master of a complicated game. But now Warren is claiming that Trump has a clever scheme to get impeached. A scheme so clever that so far he's failed to turn any Republican Senators (except maybe Romney) against him.

And it wouldn't be hard to alienate GOP Senators. He could just utter 4 words: "Tax hike" and then "Gun control."
" Columbus wasn’t a profile in courage or brilliance despite the odds, he was a dumb motherfucker that got lucky. Oddly, that makes him the perfect talisman for the Trump era."
--Mo

User avatar
Eric the .5b
Posts: 14907
Joined: 26 Apr 2010, 16:29

Re: Orange is the new President

Post by Eric the .5b »

Jadagul wrote:
09 Dec 2019, 16:52
Eric the .5b wrote:
09 Dec 2019, 16:40
Jadagul wrote:
09 Dec 2019, 16:24
(Before you try to use Trump as a counterexample, he was viewed as quite moderate during the 2016 election. On average people thought he was more moderate than they thought Clinton was.)
"Was viewed" by who?
Voters.
...I guess it's entirely possible that the guy with the big neo-nazi fandom, the one who was promising to build a border wall and lock up his opponent, struck low-information voters as "moderate".
"Better that ten guilty persons escape than that one innocent suffer."
Cet animal est très méchant / Quand on l'attaque il se défend.

User avatar
lunchstealer
Posts: 18781
Joined: 26 Apr 2010, 17:25
Location: The Local Fluff in the Local Bubble

Re: Orange is the new President

Post by lunchstealer »

Jadagul wrote:
09 Dec 2019, 16:52
Eric the .5b wrote:
09 Dec 2019, 16:40
Jadagul wrote:
09 Dec 2019, 16:24
(Before you try to use Trump as a counterexample, he was viewed as quite moderate during the 2016 election. On average people thought he was more moderate than they thought Clinton was.)
"Was viewed" by who?
Voters.

FiveThirtyEight had a roundup on this back in November 2016. (They've written a more recent piece on how this has shifted).

But you can also go back and look at some of the actual polling. In that poll (which is only one poll but I don't think is an outlier) they have 47% of people rating Trump as conservative, 22% as moderate, and 19% as liberal. The same poll has 58% of people rating Clinton as liberal, 25% as moderate, and 12% as conservative.

Yglesias wrote this piece on how this made some sort of sense. Trump ran on protecting Medicare and Social Security and Medicaid. He criticized Bush's Iraq policy. And he aggressively racheted down anti-gay rhertoric. None of this has really been all that reflected in his governing, which is probably why the numbers have shifted and he's now viewed as quite conservative. But during 2016 he as by and large viewed as relatively moderate.
I mean, Hillary gets a higher raw 'moderate' score, its just that the social signaling is a bit less confusing so there aren't people thinking she's conservative except dumbass DemSoc Bernistas.
"Dude she's the Purdue Pharma of the black pill." - JasonL

"This thread is like a dog park where everyone lets their preconceptions and biases run around and sniff each others butts." - Hugh Akston

"That's just tokenism with extra steps." - Jake

User avatar
Jadagul
Posts: 7561
Joined: 26 Apr 2010, 18:51

Re: Orange is the new President

Post by Jadagul »

lunchstealer wrote:
10 Dec 2019, 00:59
Jadagul wrote:
09 Dec 2019, 16:52
Eric the .5b wrote:
09 Dec 2019, 16:40
Jadagul wrote:
09 Dec 2019, 16:24
(Before you try to use Trump as a counterexample, he was viewed as quite moderate during the 2016 election. On average people thought he was more moderate than they thought Clinton was.)
"Was viewed" by who?
Voters.

FiveThirtyEight had a roundup on this back in November 2016. (They've written a more recent piece on how this has shifted).

But you can also go back and look at some of the actual polling. In that poll (which is only one poll but I don't think is an outlier) they have 47% of people rating Trump as conservative, 22% as moderate, and 19% as liberal. The same poll has 58% of people rating Clinton as liberal, 25% as moderate, and 12% as conservative.

Yglesias wrote this piece on how this made some sort of sense. Trump ran on protecting Medicare and Social Security and Medicaid. He criticized Bush's Iraq policy. And he aggressively racheted down anti-gay rhertoric. None of this has really been all that reflected in his governing, which is probably why the numbers have shifted and he's now viewed as quite conservative. But during 2016 he as by and large viewed as relatively moderate.
I mean, Hillary gets a higher raw 'moderate' score, its just that the social signaling is a bit less confusing so there aren't people thinking she's conservative except dumbass DemSoc Bernistas.
She also had way more people rating her as "Liberal" than Trump had rating him as "Conservative".

Part of the problem is also that "moderate" is a shitty word. If we had a candidate who wanted to ethnically purge all the Hispanics and also wanted to make unions mandatory, nationalize several industries, and outlaw private health care, I don't know that it really makes sense to call that position "moderate". But it's also not clearly right or left; it's extreme in both directions.

Trump had some positions where he was hugely extreme. But on a lot of the traditional battleground issues, his rhetoric and stated positions were quite moderate. According to his campaign speeches, he was a squish on entitlements, supportive of gay rights, and extremely dovish. None of that has really panned out because he doesn't give a shit about those issues, and to the extent his original position wasn't bullshit it was coopted by the institutional Republican party (in exchange for them yielding to him on his priorities, which are immigration and rampant corruption).

But if you make a list of major contested issues as of 2014, and then score Candidate Trump based on what he said at major moments (as opposed to either evaluating his internet fanbase or trying to infer what he really meant), and compare this to a hypothetical Generic Republican Candidate, he was shockingly not conservative.

Remember that immigration wasn't really a major left/right battleground issue prior to Trump's election; his success has made that a central feature of the ideological landscape in a way it wasn't before.

User avatar
Shem
Posts: 8382
Joined: 27 Apr 2010, 00:27

Re: Orange is the new President

Post by Shem »

Jadagul wrote:
10 Dec 2019, 01:50
Remember that immigration wasn't really a major left/right battleground issue prior to Trump's election; his success has made that a central feature of the ideological landscape in a way it wasn't before.
I must have missed the Democratic members of the clique that killed the Gang of Eight's immigration bill, then.
"VOTE SHEMOCRACY! You will only have to do it once!" -Loyalty Officer Aresen

User avatar
Jadagul
Posts: 7561
Joined: 26 Apr 2010, 18:51

Re: Orange is the new President

Post by Jadagul »

It had a left-right valence, but it wasn't a major focus of ideological combat.

There wasn't a Gang of Eight tax bill. They tried to put together a Gang of Eight deficit bill and they couldn't. But lots of Republicans were pro-immigration! (And some Democrats were opposed.)

Like, this is a big part of why Trump won the primary. Most of the establishment candidates were talking about outreach to Hispanic groups and being more generous on immigration, and Trump represented the large but not-a-majority fraction of the Republican primary electorate that was staunchly opposed there. His opposition to immigration was his differentiation from the field, not a standard part of it.

User avatar
thoreau
Posts: 30046
Joined: 06 May 2010, 12:56
Location: Back to the lab again

Re: Orange is the new President

Post by thoreau »

Isn't "differentiation from the field" kind of the opposite of moderation?
" Columbus wasn’t a profile in courage or brilliance despite the odds, he was a dumb motherfucker that got lucky. Oddly, that makes him the perfect talisman for the Trump era."
--Mo

User avatar
Jadagul
Posts: 7561
Joined: 26 Apr 2010, 18:51

Re: Orange is the new President

Post by Jadagul »

Nah. Extremism is one way to differentiate yourself from the field, but not the only way. Like, Biden stands out in the Democratic field right now in large part as the moderate.

If we ask how Primary Candidate Trump was different from Rubio or Jeb Bush or Cruz or whatever, the answer is that he was more extreme on immigration, but more moderate on entitlements and more dovish on foreign military intervention. Right now that makes him seem very conservative for two reasons. One is that we can see that the moderation on entitlements and dovishness were mostly bullshit, and second is that immigration is the Defining Issue of Our Times.

But low-information voters couldn't/didn't predict the bullshit; and in 2015/2016, immigration was not the Defining Issue of Our Times. We'd spent the past ten years arguing about health care and entitlements, and Trump was more moderate there.

User avatar
thoreau
Posts: 30046
Joined: 06 May 2010, 12:56
Location: Back to the lab again

Re: Orange is the new President

Post by thoreau »

Extremism on immigration was the defining issue of his campaign from day 1. He said that Mexico was sending us rapists and kept talking about his stupid wall.

If you want to argue that some scorecard filled out via an algorithm devised in 2014 would not classify him as extremist, well, fine. All sorts of stupid classifications are possible if you don't update your models based on new observations. But anyone who was observing him in 2015-2016 was either fearing or hoping that he'd do something extreme about immigration.

Again, if the only point is that some hip analyst who's really enthusiastic about machine-learning algorithms would not be able to classify him as extremist based on scorecards developed in 2014, that point is trivially valid and profoundly irrelevant. Humans performing qualitative observations in 2015-2016 knew what this was.
" Columbus wasn’t a profile in courage or brilliance despite the odds, he was a dumb motherfucker that got lucky. Oddly, that makes him the perfect talisman for the Trump era."
--Mo

User avatar
Jadagul
Posts: 7561
Joined: 26 Apr 2010, 18:51

Re: Orange is the new President

Post by Jadagul »

Some people were hoping he'd do something extreme _on immigration_. Or fearing it.

I could make other comments about this, which is that the whole point of the "seriously but not literally" argument is that they wanted him to do something moderate on immigration and his extreme rhetoric was just a commitment device.

But that's beside my actual point, which is that he could be extreme _on immigration_ but not extreme _on a left-right spectrum_. Actual voters didn't think he was extremely conservative. If you ranked him according to all issues he wasn't extremely conservative. If you ranked him on the issue that had had the most left/right clash over the previous five years, he wasn't extremely conservative.

His presidency has redefined enough axes that now he seems really far to the right. But that's because we know his policies better and also because different issues have primary salience now.

User avatar
thoreau
Posts: 30046
Joined: 06 May 2010, 12:56
Location: Back to the lab again

Re: Orange is the new President

Post by thoreau »

Nakedly racist arguments against immigration have always had more right-wing baggage than left-wing baggage. Yes, there are immigration restrictionists on the left, but they know not to say certain things. Republicans mostly also know not to say those things, but they come closer to saying them. When Trump said those things, nobody said "Huh, this race-baiting doesn't fit neatly onto a left-right spectrum." Everyone knows that when lefties race-bait it's by calling people racist and when conservatives race-bait it's by daring people to call them racist.

If you want to argue that his trade war rhetoric doesn't fit neatly onto a left-right spectrum, fine. If you want to argue that some of his stances were moderate, fine. But when he went extreme, it was pretty clear what kind of extremist he was. If that doesn't fit onto a scorecard developed by an algorithms geek in 2014, that just means that you need to be willing to update your models.
" Columbus wasn’t a profile in courage or brilliance despite the odds, he was a dumb motherfucker that got lucky. Oddly, that makes him the perfect talisman for the Trump era."
--Mo

User avatar
Jadagul
Posts: 7561
Joined: 26 Apr 2010, 18:51

Re: Orange is the new President

Post by Jadagul »

I'm talking about how the actual people involved did actually perceive him.

Like, the starting point of this conversation is that empirically, in 2016, if you went to random voters and asked them, they thought Trump was a relative moderate. That is a thing they believed. If the question is "did people think Trump was a moderate?", then the answer is yes.

Should people have thought he was a moderate? Well, that depends on what you mean by "moderate", but I'm willing to stipulate for right now that no, they shouldn't have. But they still _did_.

The rest of my post is trying to explain why they did. There are good reasons for it! Maybe those reasons were dumb, but they exist!

But the conversation has to start from realizing that that is, actually, in fact, what people thought.

User avatar
thoreau
Posts: 30046
Joined: 06 May 2010, 12:56
Location: Back to the lab again

Re: Orange is the new President

Post by thoreau »

If people thought that Trump was a moderate then it just reinforces my conviction that democracy should be abolished, and the First Amendment should no longer apply to Twitter and Facebook.

We should go back to monarchy.
" Columbus wasn’t a profile in courage or brilliance despite the odds, he was a dumb motherfucker that got lucky. Oddly, that makes him the perfect talisman for the Trump era."
--Mo

User avatar
Pham Nuwen
Posts: 8761
Joined: 27 Apr 2010, 02:17

Re: Orange is the new President

Post by Pham Nuwen »

I thought he was an idiot who would be able to stumble his way out of Afghanistan and Iraq. I thought he was dead serious about the immigration and trade stuff but that he would be completely cock blocked by Congress and the bureaucracy.

I am a stupid motherfucker sometimes. Probably all the time.

Edit: I never thought he would win.
Goddamn libertarian message board. Hugh Akston

leave me to my mescaline smoothie in peace, please. dhex

User avatar
Hugh Akston
Posts: 19534
Joined: 05 May 2010, 15:51
Location: El Pueblo de Nuestra Señora Reina de los Angeles

Re: Orange is the new President

Post by Hugh Akston »

Pham Nuwen wrote:
10 Dec 2019, 17:32
I thought he was an idiot who would be able to stumble his way out of Afghanistan and Iraq. I thought he was dead serious about the immigration and trade stuff but that he would be completely cock blocked by Congress and the bureaucracy.

I am a stupid motherfucker sometimes. Probably all the time.

Edit: I never thought he would win.
All of this applies to me as well.
"Is a Lulztopia the best we can hope for?!?" ~Taktix®
"Somali pirates are beholden to their hostages in a way that the USG is not." ~Dangerman

User avatar
Warren
Posts: 29889
Joined: 26 Apr 2010, 17:03
Location: Goat Rope MO
Contact:

Re: Orange is the new President

Post by Warren »

Hugh Akston wrote:
10 Dec 2019, 18:13
Pham Nuwen wrote:
10 Dec 2019, 17:32
I thought he was an idiot who would be able to stumble his way out of Afghanistan and Iraq. I thought he was dead serious about the immigration and trade stuff but that he would be completely cock blocked by Congress and the bureaucracy.

I am a stupid motherfucker sometimes. Probably all the time.

Edit: I never thought he would win.
All of this applies to me as well.
We should form a club.
THIS SPACE FOR RENT

User avatar
D.A. Ridgely
Posts: 20241
Joined: 26 Apr 2010, 17:09
Location: The Other Side

Re: Orange is the new President

Post by D.A. Ridgely »

In fairness, Trump hasn't accomplished much of his agenda, such as it was or may at the moment be. I underestimated, as I suspect everyone did, his obliviousness and indifference to the rule of law is and grudgingly have to give him credit for using what unchecked executive powers he does have as well ('well' being contextual here) as he has. I also underestimated the extent to which the Republicans could tether themselves to someone who is almost singlehandedly leading their party over the cliff for who knows how long. I think I more or less correctly predicted the resistance he's gotten from "the deep state," aka the government. Finally, I underestimated the robustness of the post Great Recession economy, the endurance of which is the only thing that has kept him from ignominiously burning out much sooner.

Now, if only we could find someone to destroy the Democratic Party, too ....

User avatar
thoreau
Posts: 30046
Joined: 06 May 2010, 12:56
Location: Back to the lab again

Re: Orange is the new President

Post by thoreau »

D.A. Ridgely wrote:
10 Dec 2019, 20:24
I underestimated, as I suspect everyone did, his obliviousness and indifference to the rule of law is and grudgingly have to give him credit for using what unchecked executive powers he does have as well ('well' being contextual here) as he has.
He's under-performing relative to my paranoia, but is about as bad as I expected in my more sober moments.
I also underestimated the extent to which the Republicans could tether themselves to someone who is almost singlehandedly leading their party over the cliff for who knows how long.
I feel like this is something I should find unsurprising, since I love Rick Perlstein's history of the GOP becoming the people they pandered to. Still, some part of me secretly suspected that they must know that this is bullshit. (Perlstein seems to have suspected the same.) And maybe they do know it's bullshit. But they are absolutely terrified to say anything. We could explain it as rational self-interest in the face of a highly-motivated base, but as they get closer and closer to that cliff I have to wonder if some of them are also facing blackmail of some sort.

Then again, I'm not convinced that America has a "rock bottom" point below which it will stop falling. Maybe Trump isn't leading them to a cliff. Maybe enough people in enough key states are perfectly fine with this shit and that will keep them in power anyway.
Finally, I underestimated the robustness of the post Great Recession economy, the endurance of which is the only thing that has kept him from ignominiously burning out much sooner.
Ditto. I thought for sure that a new recession would have started by now, and I even thought that when I assumed Clinton would win. Once Trump won, I figured that his dumbfuckery would just hasten it.
" Columbus wasn’t a profile in courage or brilliance despite the odds, he was a dumb motherfucker that got lucky. Oddly, that makes him the perfect talisman for the Trump era."
--Mo

User avatar
Aresen
Posts: 17070
Joined: 26 Apr 2010, 20:18
Location: Great White Pacific Northwest

Re: Orange is the new President

Post by Aresen »

Pham Nuwen wrote:
10 Dec 2019, 17:32
I thought he was an idiot who would be able to stumble his way out of Afghanistan and Iraq.
I could almost forgive him the rest of his shit if he actually did get the US out of the Bush Wars.

The one thing I do have to give him credit for is he hasn't started a war with Iran or North Korea.
If Trump supporters wanted a tough guy, why did they elect such a whiny bitch? - Mo

Those who know history are doomed to deja vu. - the innominate one

Never bring a knife to a joke fight" - dhex

User avatar
Aresen
Posts: 17070
Joined: 26 Apr 2010, 20:18
Location: Great White Pacific Northwest

Re: Orange is the new President

Post by Aresen »

Warren wrote:
10 Dec 2019, 19:59
Hugh Akston wrote:
10 Dec 2019, 18:13
Pham Nuwen wrote:
10 Dec 2019, 17:32
I thought he was an idiot who would be able to stumble his way out of Afghanistan and Iraq. I thought he was dead serious about the immigration and trade stuff but that he would be completely cock blocked by Congress and the bureaucracy.

I am a stupid motherfucker sometimes. Probably all the time.

Edit: I never thought he would win.
All of this applies to me as well.
We should form a club.
Good idea. We could name it after a taxonomic family of insects.
If Trump supporters wanted a tough guy, why did they elect such a whiny bitch? - Mo

Those who know history are doomed to deja vu. - the innominate one

Never bring a knife to a joke fight" - dhex

User avatar
D.A. Ridgely
Posts: 20241
Joined: 26 Apr 2010, 17:09
Location: The Other Side

Re: Orange is the new President

Post by D.A. Ridgely »

Aresen wrote:
10 Dec 2019, 21:07

The one thing I do have to give him credit for is he hasn't started a war with Iran or North Korea.
I think the credit there goes to the fact that the leaders of those nations, though madmen, are not crazy.

User avatar
Aresen
Posts: 17070
Joined: 26 Apr 2010, 20:18
Location: Great White Pacific Northwest

Re: Orange is the new President

Post by Aresen »

D.A. Ridgely wrote:
10 Dec 2019, 21:38
Aresen wrote:
10 Dec 2019, 21:07

The one thing I do have to give him credit for is he hasn't started a war with Iran or North Korea.
I think the credit there goes to the fact that the leaders of those nations, though madmen, are not crazy.
Maybe so, but that doesn't seem to have stopped his predecessors from starting wars.
If Trump supporters wanted a tough guy, why did they elect such a whiny bitch? - Mo

Those who know history are doomed to deja vu. - the innominate one

Never bring a knife to a joke fight" - dhex

User avatar
thoreau
Posts: 30046
Joined: 06 May 2010, 12:56
Location: Back to the lab again

Re: Orange is the new President

Post by thoreau »

Kim Jong Un is quite canny in manipulating Trump. I guess Un knows a thing or two about pudgy, powerful, paranoid men who got where they are because of their fathers.

I'm not sure how Iran has avoided Trump's wrath. Maybe his handlers deserve credit for that one.
" Columbus wasn’t a profile in courage or brilliance despite the odds, he was a dumb motherfucker that got lucky. Oddly, that makes him the perfect talisman for the Trump era."
--Mo

Post Reply