I’m sorry—I badly underestimated Trump’s appeal to voters

Newsweek ^ | 6/5/16 | Lloyd Gruber

[Grampa Dave]

Thanks for refreshing my memory: Newsweak is a waste of wood pulp and a waste of bandwidth, in its digital form. It used to be a "news magazine" that helped the unfortunates pass time in waiting rooms and barbershops. Over the past 30 years, it became a US version of Izvestia.

[stocksthatgoup]

Go to Trump’’s website check out sections on issues and positions.

[Tucker39]

Nah! That’s where I bagged it. He doesn’t know his butt from a water pistol.

[chajin]

Most candidates spend their campaign season introducing themselves to most voters. Even longtime politicians are largely unknown when running for a new office.
Trump, however, has been a well known popular brand for 40 years. Everybody knows him.

Let's go even deeper with this point, because it cuts to the core of much of what has been happening in the last century or so.

Republicans become Presidents, with a few exceptions, when they are already known by the public. Teddy Roosevelt was already well-known as the head of the Rough Riders, and Taft got a boost by being personally selected by TR as his successor. Eisenhower was already well-known as the European theater commander in WWII, and Nixon got a boost by being his VP for eight years. Reagan was already well-known as a TV and movie actor, and GHWB got a boost by being his VP for eight years. (GWB should never have become President; that was a failure of the Democrat fraud machine, which didn't pony up enough votes to win Florida.)

By contrast, Democrats become Presidents in part because the media makes it their job to ensure they become known favorably by the public. That was done for Franklin Roosevelt, who had the NYT and most of the Hearst papers on his side. Ditto for JFK who had the networks on his side, and then later for Carter, for Clinton, and most recently and evidently for Obama.

One could argue, I think, that, given the media's penchant for ensuring favorable name recognition of Democrat candidates for POTUS, that the only way a Republican candidate can outright win the office is to already be well-known, and generally favorably known, by the public, and that requires someone outside the political milieu, whose "narrative" cannot be made up by the media (cf. "Sarah Palin"). Which is one reason why Trump will win, and why the Democrats don't know how to concoct a counter-narrative for Trump that will stick.

P.S. Corollary: if the candidate in 1996 had been Jack Kemp, an already-known QB, instead of Bob Dole, US history could well be very different.

[TalBlack]

“Maybe it’s the rage, stupid. Or more specifically, the animosity toward immigrants, even though America used to be held up as a beacon for oppressed people around the world. That used to be why America was great. “

Delusional. Even as the author admits he missed the call he continues to believe motivation and sentiment on the part of Trump supporters to be hateful and evil. Jeez even when these clowns think they they are being UNCOMPROMISINGLY honest they are deluding themselves...

[M Kehoe]

And the New York Times has morphed into Pravda.

5.56mm

[Theodore R.]

Even John Connally got one delegate: an Arkansas woman for whom a bridge is named:

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Ada_Mills

[Albion Wilde]

Make America Great Again

Ping!

This ping provides two daily lists of links to Trump-related threads on FR.
To be added to or dropped from this ping list,
post your request on the thread below or freepmail to Albion Wilde.

* * *

Selected Trump articles on FR, from 10:00 PM yesterday to 3:30 PM today EDT, 6/5/16:
When Mexicans Feared American Immigration –Politico
Oregon GOP rally behind Trump as only choice –TheBendBulletin
Hillary Clinton blames rally violence on Trump: ‘He lowered the bar’ –Wash.Times
I’m sorry—I badly underestimated Trump’s appeal to voters –Lloyd Gruber, Newsweek
Woo hoo!! Working on the last $2k!! Let's wrap this baby up!! –Jim Robinson
Former Secret Service Officer Spills the Beans on Hillary –Thomas Lifson
Book: Crisis of Character (about the Clintons) makes #1 on Amazon –Amazon
Donald Trump Reflects on His Relationship With Muhammad Ali –NYT
Idiot San Jose Mayor Who Blamed Riots on Trump Gets DESTROYED on Social Media –Truthfeed
Sheriff David Clarke Discusses The Violent Anti-Trump Thugs and Rioters – San Jose Police Chief Garcia Responds –Sundance
Reward offered for identity of anti-Trump THUG that did this –RedStateWatcher
San Jose police: proctecting Trump supporters would further inflame socialist mob –Joe Newby
Hillary Clinton Won’t Say if Right to Bear Arms Is Constitutional Right –FreeBeacon
Trump backs Ellmers in first congressional endorsement –Politico
Criminal immigrants reoffend at higher rates than ICE has suggested –BostonGlobe
Liz Warren steps up Trump attacks, calls him 'insecure money-grubber' –BostonHerald
He’s of ‘German heritage’: Hillary baits fans into calling Trump a Nazi –NYPost
McConnell pushes Trump to change –TheHill
Man who Donald Trump called "my African-American" speaks out –CBS
Trump's bold vision for reshaping map may be hampered by his own 'malpractice' –Yahoo
Gingrich: Trump's attacks on judge 'unacceptable' –TheHill

[Grampa Dave]

Thanks for the ping!

[AndyJackson]

That makes 1760th pundit who guessed it wrong.

Not only did he get it wrong, but he still gets it wrong about getting it wrong.

she is good with details, but the details aren’t what voters care about (see above). They aren’t looking for charisma per se; Vermont Senator Bernie Sanders isn’t charismatic. Democrats – like Republicans – are looking for someone who can inspire confidence, who can communicate a simple, easy-to-understand vision for the country.

This is B.S. on every level. Hillary is terrible with details, especially details that matter, like protecting American interests under attack at 3:00 AM after a late night bender. And we aren't looking for a simple vision for the country. We are looking for a vision that can be understood at all, and that after all the nuances are weighed and balanced gets us somewhere besides more loot circulating inside the beltway.

Or this failure to understand his own kind: There is a soak-the-rich mentality among young voters that looks more European than American. Maybe it has something to do with their disappointment in the Obama revolution.

As Eric Trump put it Washington is filled with people who are doing well by doing nothing at all. It isn't much a "soak the rich" attitude as it is an attitude that Washington should stop being middle man in the wanna be wealthy soaking us. We don't resent people who made their fortune building a business selling us things we willingly buy. We resent people who get rich off graft and corruption.

Or this: The remoteness of a Trump presidency is what made it safe for primary voters to support him, or so I would (still very humbly) submit.

We don't support Trump as a one-fingered salute to Washington DC. safe in our convictions he would never get there. This isn't a Ross Perot vote. We supported Trump because we saw he was just what the country needed. And HOW! AND NOW!

[RoosterRedux]

Note that while many political scientists "have been behind the curve" in recognizing what Trump would accomplish, many Freepers were not. We have been well aware of what was coming since the day Trump announced his candidacy last summer.

As usual, Freepers proved themselves to be ahead of the curve...and therefore once again ahead of the political science establishment.

[Theodore R.]

Well, I don’t think Kemp would have been any better once in office than Dole. Paul Ryan-o is the proof!!!

[Arrian]

Aristotle, Cicero, Shakespeare, Michelangelo, Mozart, among many hundreds; never had credentials/degrees like this poly scientist. Just think how deprived they were??? What a shame.

[higgmeister]

The comment about Leicester City Football told me how clueless this educated fool really is.

So what about now? Are the surprises over? Could anything else surprising happen between now and the election? I think the answer is yes: a Trump victory. If that happened, it would be like Leicester City Football Club winning the Premier League.

He put his CV on line - with references:

https://lloydgruber.files.wordpress.com/2013/12/lloyd-grubers-cv.pdf

CURRICULUM VITAE

Lloyd Gruber

Business Address:
Department of International Development
The London School of Economics
Houghton Street
London WC2A 2AE
+44 (0)20 7955 6224

Home Address:
69 Antrim Road
London NW3 4XL
+44 (0)20 7433 1476

Email Address: L.Gruber@lse.ac.uk

CURRENT POSITIONS:
Dean, LSE Institute of Public Affairs
London School of Economics, 2012 – present

Lecturer in Political Economy (tenured)
Department of International Development
London School of Economics, 2006 – present

EDUCATION:
Stanford University
Ph.D. in Political Science, June 1994

Oxford University
M.Phil. in Politics, June 1988
Thesis: The Political Economy of Taxation

Harvard College
B.A. in Social Studies, June 1986
Magna Cum Laude & Phi Beta Kappa

[Rastus]

The only degree that matters is 98.6.

I don’t know what that means, but it’s as good as “It’s not how fast you mow, it’s how well you mow fast.”

[knarf]

Making Trump the true insider (with the greater percentage of the American people). and all those "insiders" ?

outsiders !

[miss marmelstein]

In rereading two of David Horowitz’s books this weekend, I’m amazed how prescient freepers have been for going on 20 years. We may not be as felicitous in our prose but we have been well ahead of the curve than some of the most brilliant writers and thinkers.

Perhaps because we live more closely with the effects of the left??

[miss marmelstein]

And he learned absolutely nothing at any of those institutions of greater learning!

[higgmeister]

Perhaps because we live more closely with the effects of the left??

That's why I love my fellow FReepers. We have lived in the trenches with all the passion, rebellion, despair, elation, pride, courage and fortitude. Mother wit isn't taught in any school.

[RoosterRedux]

Perhaps because we live more closely with the effects of the left?

IMHO, our prescience is also due to the fact that we have a forum for exchanging ideas and we listen to each other.

I read a lot of stuff, but my substance seems to always come from what I learn from my fellow Freepers.

You can be sure that Krauthammer and Bill Kristol and Erick Erickson don't have such a sounding board. Well, actually, they do have such a sounding board (if they were to read FR), but they choose not to avail themselves of such.