Richard Dawkins and Other Prominent Scientists React to Trump’s Win

Nov 13, 2016

By Andrea Gawrylewski

This week the U.S. elected businessman and reality TV star Donald Trump as its 45th president. As Scientific American has reported in the run-up to the election, Trump’s views on science, health and medicine appear unformed at best, ignorant and destructive at worst. To get an idea of what top minds in science, health and research are thinking, we reached out to Scientific American‘s Board of Advisers to get their quick-fire reactions to the election outcome. The excerpts, some of them edited for length, appear below.


Continue reading by clicking the name of the source below.

33 comments on “Richard Dawkins and Other Prominent Scientists React to Trump’s Win

  • A smaller than projected voter turnout (approximately seven million
    Democrats and two million Republicans less than the 2012 election) was
    likely the cause of the outcome. Unexpected outcomes are part of
    scientific life and we are experts at learning from them. —Michael
    Gazzaniga, director, Sage Center for the Study of the Mind, University
    of California, Santa Barbara

    I agree. Just over half of registered voters went to the polls. The other 45% couldn’t be bothered to directly participate in the representative process. I do not think it was the electoral college that failed us; it was the electorate. And frankly, with that kind of apathy we deserve exactly what we get.



    Report abuse

  • @OP – As Scientific American has reported in the run-up to the election, Trump’s views on science, health and medicine appear unformed at best, ignorant and destructive at worst.

    I think this sums up many of the problems in a modern world dependent on technology and co-ordinated environmental policies!



    Report abuse

  • It takes a Brit (Martin Rees) to write this-

    The one “plus” from this result is that reducing poverty may move higher on the agenda of the right as well as the left.

    It takes an American to write this-

    I personally was born into poverty, and everything I have accomplished I did on my own.

    This latter was certainly the acme of eighteenth century Enlightenment thinking. Its like two hundred years of psychological, sociological and political evidence never happened.



    Report abuse

  • phil rimmer #3
    Nov 13, 2016 at 6:37 am

    It takes an American to write this-

    I personally was born into poverty, and everything I have accomplished I did on my own.

    Yep! No communication systems, transport systems, educational information systems, electricity or gas services, co-operative neighbours, monetary systems, no employees, colleagues, trading partners, investors, materials or component suppliers, no legal frameworks, trading agreements etc. !

    Wealth created and grabbed, by a solo individual in splendid isolation on a desert island! {or should that be behind security gates} – (According to egotistical self delusion!)



    Report abuse

  • Nice illustration, Vicki.

    I am in awe of many entrepreneurs…I am a capitalist. Many of my heroes are entirely those key catalisers of technology adoption. Matthew Boulton a particular genius in selling steam power.

    I have been widely involved in many aspects of innovative technology and have met the real innovators behind Job’s products, small independent companies some of whom were simply ripped off, their ideas taken without proper or any recompense. It is historically pretty usual, Bell, Edison, Marconi built businesses by often stealing the best of others. I’ve had a few such experiences myself.

    But its not just about the the act of starting a business, its about the access to a rich and savvy market. Many attempts at a product or service are tried before success. This educates the market about what to expect and whether they want such products. No technology is born without rich and complex pre-cursor activity, zeroing in on need and value. The failures of others are essential to building a later success for the few.



    Report abuse

  • Hi Vicki [#1],

    45% couldn’t be bothered to directly participate in the representative process …

    How do you know they couldn’t be bothered?

    … with that kind of apathy …

    How do you know that those who didn’t vote we’re not fully engaged in withholding their votes?

    … we deserve exactly what we get

    Hmm. There is a significant case to be made for voting for a less worst candidate, I’ll grant you that.

    But, when the media’s election coverage consists of spinning the downsides of both candidates – so bad that you question why they deserve power at all – constantly pointing out there are only two ‘real’ candidates and giving the impression that passion trumps thought … just how, exactly, are the time-poor employees challenged by globalization expected to note the fact that the World could get a lot worse?

    Worse according to whom? … by the way?

    Peace.



    Report abuse

  • Hmm. There is a significant case to be made for voting for a less
    worst candidate, I’ll grant you that.

    Yes. And topping the list of cons would be the futility of completely disengaging. You don’t take your ball and go home when things don’t go your way. You look at the options and make a decision.

    And I learned something of (to me) great importance this election cycle: from now on I will be voting the candidates’ platforms. I confess that used to be something that was on my list of priorities, but not at the top.



    Report abuse

  • But, when the media’s election coverage consists of spinning the downsides of both candidates – so bad that you question why they deserve power at all – constantly pointing out there are only two ‘real’ candidates and giving the impression that passion trumps thought … just how, exactly, are the time-poor employees challenged by globalization expected to note the fact that the World could get a lot worse?

    Nearly every single American here (these are the bright folk) has consistently talked of passions not policies as the likely decider. I don’t think it a media thang particularly.

    Time poor? Really?



    Report abuse

  • If Trump denies science, as he appears to, perhaps less than Mike Spence the VP elect, then the USA is heading for economic relegation. OK the USA is the most powerful country in the world, BUT not the only country. There are plenty of Asian tigers willing to assume that mantle, and not just paper tigers.



    Report abuse

  • http://www.independent.co.uk/news/people/david-attenborough-donald-trump-shoot-radio-times-interview-michael-gove-a7390476.html

    Sir David, who returns to screens for Planet Earth II this weekend, said the British public had no way of influencing the outcome of the US presidential elections so proposed an altogether more extreme solution.

    Also the catastrophe of employing politicians like UK’s buffoon, Michael Gove! :-

    Sir David argued the claim, frequently touted by Michael Gove, during the Brexit campaign that “we’ve had enough of experts” was “catastrophic”.



    Report abuse

  • Good point, Phil; it was an avalanche of passion. Hillary made mistakes and the media may have caused problems – but it is hard to contend with a tsunami of passion. (Mixed metaphor.)

    Alan, permit me to be maudlin: I wish you could be Trump’s chief adviser.



    Report abuse

  • Vicky #1 ” I do not think it was the electoral college that failed us; it was the electorate. And frankly, with that kind of apathy we deserve exactly what we get.”

    And there is the problem. It seems every few generations there needs to be a disaster in politics to get people involved. The same can be said for wars. We need to see the effects, the economy destroyed, the injured and dead.
    We do not learn.



    Report abuse

  • Alan #11

    I am having ongoing problems liking your post. The mods seem in defensive spasm at the moment, possibly worried about the shootey comment which I thoroughly don’t endorse, but the rest is spot on.

    As we get older we get, in one sense, more honest. Our social censor in the anterior cingulate cortex kicks in too late and your aging mother says what she really thinks about your wife….

    I think we got an uncensored opinion from a a rather unbuttoned nonagenarian David Attenborough. Some people though have a pretty dodgy connection to their ACC at any age. Trump, seems to have very little linkage at all. Give it a year or two, when its totally fritzed and a red button instead of a gun and we could all be regretting his new found “honesty”.



    Report abuse

  • phil rimmer #14
    Nov 13, 2016 at 5:05 pm

    As we get older we get, in one sense, more honest. Our social censor in the anterior cingulate cortex kicks in too late and your aging mother says what she really thinks about your wife….

    I think this is a case of “two cultures divided by a common language”!

    When someone in England, has being overplaying a knock on the leg or cramp, in some sporting context, it is quite common for team mates to play along, suggesting it looks “too bad for treatment” and “a trip to the vet to be shot is needed”!

    That sort of comment made in a light hearted aside in England where people do not make gun ownership a big issue, perhaps does not have the same connotations as with those armed to the teeth in defensive mode in the US.

    Anyway – The OP asked what scientists thought of the result!



    Report abuse

  • Hi Vicki [#8],

    … topping the list of cons would be the futility of completely disengaging

    I don’t believe that withholding one’s vote is futile. The Democrats are the one’s who should receive this message with shame.

    … you don’t take your ball and go home when things don’t go your way

    Says who?

    You look at the options and make a decision

    And your point would be?

    I learned something of (to me) great importance this election cycle: from now on I will be voting the candidates’ platforms

    I can see how a rational, empirical, logical citizen would conclude that – this is simply repeating your lesser of two evils idea.

    Now, how do we sell that to an electorate that shows few signs – by and large – of applying reason, evidence and logic – but does apply emotion, sound bites and jumps on Band Wagons?

    The election result is in. Learn, or die.

    Peace.



    Report abuse

  • Hi Phil [#9],

    Nearly every single American here (these are the bright folk) has consistently talked of passions not policies as the likely decider

    Yes, interesting isn’t it. No-one is rational, evidence-based and logical all the time – and this is the most common media tool to misuse and misappropriate our attention: If they can elicit an emotional response – job done.

    Why did millions of Americans vote for someone who is:
    – A self-confessed sex offender
    – Hid their personal financial history – probably to hide the fact that they’re not a philanthropist (as they claim), that they avoid paying tax (if not worse) and possibly to hide links to people of questionable moral values
    – Has been indicted on a felony charge
    – Is under investigation for possibly breaking charity law
    – Is a racist misogynist
    – Who threatened free speech
    – Who threatened to undermine the rule of law
    – etc.

    Clearly, emotional responses were being used not evidence-based decision making.

    I don’t think it a media thang particularly

    Why not? The evidence is as clear as day to me.

    Time poor? Really?

    Yes, really. Tea Party members tended to be older, retired or semi-retired, or self-employed or out of work for a reason. These people have control over their own schedules. Try working for a modern corporation and being involved in a social circle – never mind finding time for Civil Society engagement. Been there, got the T-shirt.

    And now you want me to be fully engaged in the political process too? P-lease!

    I’m just the messenger here. If you don’t want to listen, fine, expect to lose more elections.

    Peace.



    Report abuse

  • SoW and Vicki

    Hi, fellas,

    I sent this to all my stupid friends and associates who were undecided. And it was not the lesser of two evils. That’s rubbish. Trump has surrounded himself with the “lunatic fringe of the Republican Party, men and women characterized by profound intellectual and moral impoverishment, as well as a stunning ability to ignore reality.”

    Trump is a neo-fascist! Do you understand that? Now here’s some decent prose. Enjoy:

    All democratic and independent voters can’t afford to waste their votes to
    stop this malevolent leviathan! This is really happening!! Voting for a
    third party candidate is like putting out a forest fire by spitting on it.
    Useless, feckless and unencumbered independent voters can critically
    compromise the whole thing. This imperative alarm cannot be silenced or
    ignored and there is no more time for ditzy undecided luxury. All Democrats
    must fall in for duty and vote for Hillary to protect us from the oncoming
    pestilence and ignorance that is now ominously darkening the horizon!!!! We
    are now precariously at the precipice of a real dystopia, and we must vote
    him back under the rock from which he crawled out from before he
    metastasizes! Take action!! All hands on deck!! Vote for her!!!



    Report abuse

  • SoW #17

    Yes, interesting isn’t it. No-one is rational, evidence-based and logical all the time – and this is the most common media tool to misuse and misappropriate our attention: If they can elicit an emotional response – job done.

    And yet (I forget the precise numbers) 165 media outlets supported Clinton and 9 supported Trump. The media were ineffective…as was reason. People had time, seemingly to make up their own minds, but based also seemingly on matters of character or some other.

    One of the notable differences as I pointed out elsewhere was this-

    https://www.theatlantic.com/notes/2016/11/i-voted-for-the-middle-finger-the-wrecking-ball/507533/

    the wrecking ball stratagem. Even if not admitting you are breaking the country, the distaste for one seeming to be duplicitous and sleeping with the enemy may be such that you prefer someone seemingly honest even if they are from the enemy classes. As Pinker points out in his essay on this (and as Haidt would endorse) the Republicans are super loyal and will vote as they badge themselves. To win, therefore, all you need to do is create one new cohort, the neglected/fearful to swing it.

    I couldn’t agree more that the fourth estate in the US is mostly a disgrace, but as my son observed three years ago when entering university, The US manufactures narratives on an industrial scale. It both makes them and is made by them. I think there is something in the DNA of the country and not just its mostly pandering media. The US is dogma central. From its freedom of speech good heart is pumped out a freedom to believe whatever you desire. Before you can change hearts you need to tackle that fearful neglect. I maintain inequality is the root of this current cri de coeur. Again, as I wrote earlier, I think quite before any education can happen, for instance from a hopefully chastened, increasingly ignored media, you have to take care of the fear, the realisation of a theft that has happened and will certainly happen again if not stopped.



    Report abuse

  • Ha! I know some millennials. They are very casual in saying, “Oh, I never vote.” Or, “My vote won’t make any difference anyway.”

    I’m just the messenger here. If you don’t want to listen, fine, expect
    to lose more elections.

    Oh, Stephen, I fully agree a lot of the Trump votes–and non votes–were nothing more than angry people trying to send a message. If I say the method is not only pointless but harmful, please don’t equate that to not wanting to listen.

    And now you want me to be fully engaged in the political process too
    P-lease!

    Yes. It isn’t a question of want. I expect you to know the candidates for whom you are (or are not) voting. I expect it because that is your responsibility.



    Report abuse

  • Hi Dan [#18],

    … it was not the lesser of two evils …

    I know that and you know that because we spent the necessary time and applied the critical thinking required to understand when the public were being hoodwinked and their emotional reflexes were being exercised at the cost of their rational selves.

    Don’t call those who voted Trump – or Republican – stupid or dangerous: They’re challenged. One of Clinton’s biggest mistakes was the remark about the “Basket of Deplorables”. That comment was custom-made to support the other side’s approach. Many US voters do not even have a proper high school education – as regular visitors to this site must surely know.

    Trump is a neo-fascist! Do you understand that?

    Yes. Forgive me Dan, you appear to still be making your way through all five stages: Denial, anger, bargaining, depression – and I’ve arrived at acceptance. I’m learning to live with the fact that the citizens of the World’s most powerful country have just voted to lose many of their own freedoms and inalienable human rights. Inalienable? We shall find out soon enough.

    Of course we’re operating on the assumption that Trump, and Republicans in general, are as pure as the driven snow – that they would never lie to get elected then do something different … would they? Also, all those Republicans who distanced themselves from Trump – and thus made themselves electable – they wouldn’t have a different plan, perchance?

    I’m not saying this to get your hopes up – the differences between traditional Republicans and Trump, going by the evidence of recent decades, is mostly slim. But there is some hope that some policies will be more nuanced than we might at first expect.

    Health Care and Climate Change policies pursued by Obama will probably be thrown into full reverse and criminalizing most forms of immigration will continue – other policy areas are less easy to divine.

    Voting for a third party candidate is like putting out a forest fire by spitting on it … etc.

    Yes, I understand the rhetoric and how it was misused by Democrats, and leveraged by the Republicans.

    This is not critically appraising the problems and mistakes. To win, follow Elizabeth Warren’s advice: Pick yourselves up, dust yourselves off, and get back into the fight.

    Peace – ish.



    Report abuse

  • Hi Phil [#19],

    The media were ineffective … as was reason

    The independent media were ineffective against decades of propaganda when they started work on the election … after the start of the election cycle? True.

    The independent media you cite are, probably (?), real news organizations. Did they recognize that they were up against a propaganda machine? No, they didn’t. Is the audience for independent media the media read, watched and listened to by Republican-leaning voters? Mostly not. How about Trunp / Tea Party voters? No.

    I have no idea where those numbers for media outlets come from – and I don’t care, and here’s why. I spent the election cycle, post-nominations, visiting realclearpolitics.com and the stories they linked. They pretend to be independent, they’re heavily Republican. Every day the site listed 4:1 Republican-supporting versus Democrat-supporting media stories – with yellow journalism and Fox News given equal treatment to the Washington Post and the New York Times. Don’t tell me that there was no media support for Trump or Republicans – there was plenty.

    Reason was employed by whom?

    The stories I read and watched on the Democrat-leaning side were more factually based, as a general rule of thumb, but seeing Trump using appeals to emotion seemed to have the same effect on Democrat-leaning media responses. Emotional roller-coaster anyone?

    People had time, seemingly to make up their own minds, but based also seemingly on matters of character or some other

    I didn’t see anyone on the right making a decision based on character. They way ahead was well prepared by Republicans leading to what Bill Maher, in one of several good summaries on the election, called: “False Equivalence”. When the Democratic Party chose Clinton as candidate the media right must have thought all their Christmases had come at once!

    … the wrecking ball stratagem …

    Yes-yes-yes! Again with the emotional roller-coaster. The media right have spent the Tea Party Years pumping up anger over change. Here’s a point that even Bill Maher didn’t get; Bill couldn’t equate the average earnings of Trump Rally attendees during the primaries (I think he said $70,000 per year) with their anger. The US is enjoying full employment – what’s going on?

    But we forget the history at our peril. There are human stories in the statistics, and people like Bill and Hillary don’t see it because they weren’t there man!

    I previously worked amongst people in the Mid-West and I totally get why Michigan surprised so many. Manufacturing jobs lost (mostly to Mexico) after NAFTA have largely been replaced. But those working in the jobs that were exported (and there have been many more since the WTO got teeth) had to go through the pain of uncertainty, unemployment among many unemployed – watching savings evaporate (if they had any), financial pain – returning the car, loss of healthcare insurance and pensions as well as income. Then there were the personal costs; loss of self-esteem, loss of home, loss of social standing and for some even loss of family.

    What has replaced American companies that contributed to the local social networks by giving to schools, having an annual company picnic and bosses that lived just a few streets from you? Faceless conglomerates or foreign companies that pay, but they’re no longer part of the local scene. We may all be better off financially, collectively speaking, but is the World really a better place? The politicians stopped selling free trade once they got what they wanted, and these people are left only with the memory of long and painful change – and don’t tell them it didn’t hurt dammit!

    Even if not admitting you are breaking the country …

    Oh they’re not shy about saying it.

    As Pinker points out in his essay on this (and as Haidt would endorse) the Republicans are super loyal and will vote as they badge themselves. To win, therefore, all you need to do is create one new cohort, the neglected/fearful to swing it

    True. Pin a red rosette on a dog and there are plenty of places where they’ll still vote for it. How does this inform liberal Americans on how to win next time? Well, we hope they’ve learned, at least, to not dismiss any voter for their emotional attachment to a political story they identify as being theirs.

    The US manufactures narratives on an industrial scale

    Will somebody please tell the Democrats, because what I saw was a Party that sleep-walked into near oblivion.

    The US is dogma central

    The US is on a road to an intellectual-free zone, agreed – and that is a Global Concern. After this election my biggest worry is the damage that will be done to education, already teetering on the brink of disaster. It will become increasingly likely that US education will be so devalued that America will take close to a century to recover enough for the majority of voters to be able to critically appraise even the simplest media story … if they can manage the trick at all …

    I maintain inequality is the root of this current cri de Coeur

    Less passion, more reason, please.

    Peace.



    Report abuse

  • Less passion, more reason, please.

    What passion?

    This is the cause of the new cohort. I’ve talked about it often enough here. We can go through it more slowly if you like.

    I think you are failing to appreciate the delta on this occasion. The old Republican reliance on dog whistle issues and their trusted channels supporting them is same old same old. Tackling the old shit is harder work because its more entrenched. Tackling this new seed that Trump took and ran with and grew and grew attaching old-school republicans is how we can drain this new littler part of the swamp and fix just these things. Your scale is way too big to be tractable. It wasn’t tractable before and isn’t now.



    Report abuse

  • From my link

    THIS cohort

    I am tired of the machine rolling over us—all of us. The Clinton machine, the Republican machine, the big media, investment banking, hedge fund carrying interest, corporatist, lobbying, influence peddling, getting elected and immediately begin fundraising for the next election machine—they can all kiss my ass.

    If Bernie was there it might have been a different side they flopped on. It had to be a lever they pulled that was connected to something.

    Oh, and this new cohort was not necessarily Fox News accessible. This is new!



    Report abuse

  • Hi Vicki [#20],

    ”My vote won’t make any difference anyway.”

    Of course that’s true, and perfectly rational. In a country of 320m your vote for the President will be 1/320 millionth of the result. It’s like buying a lottery ticket – someone will win, but it’s unlikely (to put it mildly) to be you.

    What I would prefer to read is how you responded and actually got them to see the error in their thinking …

    I fully agree a lot of the Trump votes – and non-votes – were nothing more than angry people trying to send a message. If I say the method is not only pointless but harmful, please don’t equate that to not wanting to listen

    Oh I agree, like the voters who recognize that their vote counts for, um, just a little those who did vote Trump were voting for a wrecking ball (Phil’s phrase, not mine). I don’t equate your comments with not wanting to listen to that uncomfortable truth, but I do charge the Democratic Party with not understanding that – listening or not. Worse; I charge the Democratic Party with living in a bubble – identical from the outside in every way to a Info Wars and Breitbart Lunatic’s bubble – and not recognizing most (all?) of what just happened until way, way, too late.

    Yes. It [to be fully engaged in the political process] isn’t a question of want

    Oh, yes, it is.

    I expect you to know the candidates for whom you are (or are not) voting

    I understand that to be the democratic responsibility of every citizen. Like not dropping your gum on the sidewalk, taking that £100 in cash you found just lying in the street to the nearest Police Station and keeping to the speed limit …

    … and your point would be?

    My point, just in case it has escaped you, is that emotionally-driven media is designed – at least in part – to turn voters off and to get them to exercise their democratic right to abstain. It turns out that getting people to not vote is actually quite simple, compared to getting them to vote for an idea or character.

    I suggest that next time that conversation about voting or not voting comes up you point that out.

    I repeat: How do we sell that to an electorate that shows few signs – by and large – of applying reason, evidence and logic – but does apply emotion, sound bites and jumps on Band Wagons?

    Learn, or die.

    Peace.



    Report abuse

  • Hi Phil [#23],

    What passion?

    Cri de Couer: a passionate appeal, complaint, or protest.

    I think you are failing to appreciate the delta on this occasion. The old Republican reliance on dog whistle issues and their trusted channels supporting them is same old same old

    What, and the Democratic Party had no answer? Or perhaps they just completely missed the same old? Wow. I thought my critique was damning, but that’s excoriating!

    Phil, buddy, I haven’t set out any plan so I’m unclear on where your getting any read on scale.

    The next election is in four years.

    Peace.



    Report abuse

  • Hi Phil [#24],

    This [cohort] is new

    I am unconvinced. The disaffected, like the poor, are always with us.

    Can the Democrats split the Trump (or non-voting) blocks into two constituencies:

    Young, unimpressed by the existing $-driven, professionalized, influence peddling, politics
    Older, hurt by the existing $-driven, professionalized, influence peddling, politics

    ?

    Yes, I think they can.

    Peace.



    Report abuse

  • The disaffected, like the poor, are always with us.

    The level of your disaffection can go up as well as down. You mean nothing changes?

    It is not my cri de coeur, btw.

    The the change, in fact, happens when a group develop a sense of identity. Social media speed this process up.

    What, and the Democratic Party had no answer?

    Answered. Bernie. Next?



    Report abuse

  • Addition to #25

    … those who did vote Trump were voting for a wrecking ball [and] I do charge the Democratic Party with not understanding that – listening or not

    Actually, this is just a tad unfair. Traditional Republicans were just as clearly taken by surprise when Trump won the candidacy.

    Peace.



    Report abuse

  • Hi Phil [#28],

    The level of your disaffection can go up as well as down. You mean nothing changes?

    Nothing is too big a word. The fundamentals of politics do not change – there are always groups who feel isolated, alienated, or disillusioned.

    It is not my cri de coeur, btw.

    Okay.

    The difference happens when a group develop a sense of identity. Social media speed this process up.

    Agreed, and groups waiting to recognize that they exist are always there …

    What, and the Democratic Party had no answer?

    Answered. Bernie. Next?

    Come on Phil, you’re trying way too hard to let the Democrats off the hook. Did they select Bernie as Candidate. No. Sanders was not the Democrats’ response, Clinton was.

    Is Sanders the Democrat’s’ response next time? Maybe. Four years is a long time in politics. The Democrats 2016 experience should inform that decision – waiting with an Anointed One in the wings is not a winning strategy.

    The basics are that it’s the platform that Sanders put forward and the connections he made with the Young Disaffected that made him a real political force. But now that it’s out there the third year of a Trump or Pence presidency (if not sooner) will begin the next media right propaganda effort against such a ’socialist’ platform. That will play into Democratic hands, as far as the Young Disaffected goes, but with the wider electorate … ?

    Peace.



    Report abuse

  • Come on Phil, you’re trying way too hard to let the Democrats off the hook

    What?!!!!!!

    No! They fucked up royally. (This is me now being passionate.) The work is all theirs to do…no one else.

    Dealing with the new cohort is exactly what they needed to do. The Shock of Bernie engaging so extensively should have been a warning that new forces were about. They just relied on reason as an active human attribute too much.

    Republican super loyalty and dogmatic mental manacles make a tough carapace that can shelter great diversity. Its a rather unequal fight if you are going to throw reason in there as a counter-weapon.

    Now your last paragraph makes perfect sense. The new cohort is all to play for. Trumps’s failures to deliver specifics need to be countered by alternate policies, as he fails. (Taxing casino trading, lifting global sales and manufacturing of American eco-tec against the Chinese etc. etc.)



    Report abuse

  • Stephen and others

    Not sure what you’re trying to get me to see or do. I was challenging the “lesser of two evils” notion. I see all too clearly. See what I posted on the Post Election Healing thread. (#5) You’ll find some edifying thoughts there.

    The difference between Trump and traditional Republicans is not necessarily slim, as you say. No one can say for sure; but that statement is not supported by the evidence.

    As Mailer said: “if we ever get as sick as Germany was in the thirties we will get our Hitler.” May it not be so. But Trump is something new, appeals to ignorance and hate, saw an opening and took it.

    “Don’t call those who voted Trump – or Republican – stupid or dangerous: They’re challenged.”

    Yes, so were the brownshirts. Some of them are dangerous, and many are ignorant! Trump has unleashed the dangerous ones. Bannon is his chief adviser. He’s a white nationalist.—I am sure of it. Yes, the “deplorables” comment was a mistake, but the blue collar / rural voters wouldn’t have voted for her anyway. You can’t contend with an avalanche of passion. Hillary was (is) better qualified, period. Sanders would not have been able to win either. Do you think those who voted for Trump would ever have voted for a “socialist”? That’s all Trump would have to say, and he would have kept saying it. Sanders would have done better with the Dems and more would have come out for Trump.

    Yes, I understand the rhetoric and how it was misused by Democrats, and leveraged by the Republicans.

    I don’t know what this means; but everyone loves to blame the democrats and the media; and no one blames the Republicans (and the Koch brothers and other wealthy operatives). The media is corporate owned. Who is more to blame for the rise of the corporation? Who will serve the corporation? Again, see my posted article. (Post Election Healing thread #5).

    Btw, I don’t know where you live; but this is a global crisis. Bannon, Trump’s chief adviser, has reached out to Le Pen, the extreme right wing nationalist (and daughter of a rabid anti-semite). Le Pen (National Front) will probably win the election in 2017 now.

    This Trump victory, following Brexit, is the start of Nationalism (exclusive and oppressive nationalism) world wide.

    Trump will set us all back. We may be entering into a new era: a dystopian nightmare. I love Warren, and praised her for her comments on another thread; but the right to dissent itself might be curtailed; we’ll be completely lost. (I need to calm down.)

    Bannon: “France is the place to be, with its young entrepreneurs [and] women of the family Le Pen” adding that “Marion Marechal-Le Pen is the new rising star”.

    Look at this. I get emails from MoveOn.org:

    Dear MoveOn member,

    Our hearts are broken.

    We’re being flooded with gleeful right-wing hate mail.

    Our team is exhausted to the bone.



    Report abuse

  • Dan: Trump will set us all back. We may be entering into a new era: a dystopian nightmare.

    Majority progressive forces are waiting in the wings to mitigate, defang, then reverse the dystopian nightmare.
    Believe.



    Report abuse

Leave a Reply

View our comment policy.