Gunnar wrote:That description of Trump is so obviously right on that it is amazing to me how anyone other than thugs and half-wits can fail to see it.
That is likely to be the first reaction from many people who have actually paid detailed attention to Trump's words and actions since he began the presidential campaign that led up to his election on a minority of the popular vote in 2016.
But think a bit more, and it is considerably less amazing that Trump could have been elected with the help of people who were, in the majority, not thugs or half-wits. You see, the kind of people who contribute to a discussion board like this one, whatever sides they are on politically, are by definition the kind of people who are willing to pay at least superficial attention to written expressions of views with which they disagree, and who have the habit of setting out their own views at length and in writing.
Most people, however, have neither the time nor the inclination for that kind of thing. They get their ideas about current political activity from whatever TV or cable news they happen upon while channel surfing, or maybe by listening to talk radio in their cars. Whatever views they happen to form, they are unlikely ever to set them out in writing, with citations of the evidence on which they are based. And once they have cast their vote for a candidate, they are unlikely to want to ask themselves whether they may have made a huge mistake. If anything, if they are confronted with evidence that suggests that their choice was a bad one, they're likely to feel their self-respect demands that should they double down in loyalty to that choice. Their ideas of the actual policies that their candidate has put forward may be far from reality. Remember the Trump voters who said they were sure he wouldn't touch their ACA insurance, despite him having said loudly and repeatedly that he was determined to destroy it?
People like that mostly voted for Trump without more than superficial attention to what he was and what he said he would do. And in many cases they haven't been all that much concerned to notice what he has been and still is doing after his election. You can criticise them for that, certainly. But "thugs and half-wits'? Probably not, I'd say.