Hacker News Reader

Comment by 551199 | Hacker News Reader

This election is about establishment vs anti-establishment. People over globalisation. Remember Bernie Sanders? Anyone who has done their thinking themselves instead of CNN/FOX/MSNBC has seen this for months.

Against Trump were GOP, Democrats, left and right Media, Special Interests, all the nasty smear campaign and he still pulled through.

You do know that the wall is already there and even Clinton voted for it? Just need to be finished. [0]

Just because you haven't taken the time to look at Trumps positions doesn't mean he hasn't any. You can find them from Presidents website.[1]

[0]https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Secure_Fence_Act_of_2006 [1]https://www.donaldjtrump.com/policies/

View on HN

If it was anti-Establishment, then why did voters re-elect Congress who had a 9% approval rating, and who quite literally, are the permanent establishment, because they're gerrymandered and not term limited like the President, who changes every 8 years?

I don't buy it. anti-Establishment is the story progressives tell themselves, that the Trump voters would have been Sanders voters. But Sanders voters believe bankers and corporations have fucked over their jobs, and Trump voters think Mexicans and minorities are to blame. There might be some overlap, but telling yourself this was merely about anti-Establishment and "draining the swamp" doesn't explain why incumbents scored a huge victory tonite.

He flip flopped on his positions whenever it was convenient.

Just a few years ago, he was a Democrat, pro abortion, etc.

Do you really think a man of that age suddenly completely changes his views? And then again about every month (or hour) during the campaign?

And Clinton has Private and Public views. I get that you haven't followed Trump, but in that case you shouldn't attack him either with partial information.

The Direct Democracy President

'Months ago, when Trump stumbled on his answer about criminal penalties for women who seek illegal abortions, the public went nuts, and Trump immediately corrected his position. That’s direct democracy. Trump heard the opinion of the majority and instantly adopted it.

Consider Trump’s proposal to ban all Muslim immigration. The public felt his position was too extreme, and let him know. Eventually, Trump softened his stance to talk about countries of origin, not religion. The public still wasn’t pleased, so Trump softened again to his current position of “extreme vetting.” That evolution in policy looks like direct democracy to me. The public told Trump what it wanted, and Trump evolved to it.

Likewise, we found out this week that Trump’s plan to deport 11 million Mexicans living in the United States illegally has some wiggle room. Maybe there won’t be so much deporting after all. Because the public doesn’t want it.'[0]

[0]http://blog.dilbert.com/post/149321013966/the-direct-democra...

He said it all himself: https://pbs.twimg.com/media/Cwz8hvRWgAAY9b_.jpg:large

Snopes says that's a fake: http://www.snopes.com/1998-trump-people-quote/

But he changed his mind because he had to please the people to get elected, right?

He doesn't have to change his mind for the people again unless he wants be reelected.

If politicians change their mind all the time, we do not know what they'll do once elected, and therefore we do not know what it is we choose when we vote for them.

A lot of comments now, are about how Trump might not follow through on the stuff that was said during the campaign, or that it will become less severe. To me that sounds exactly like we do not know what sort of president the American people have elected -- And that does not sound like a good form of democracy.

> This election is about establishment vs anti-establishment. People over globalisation. Remember Bernie Sanders?

I don't understand the point you are making. If people beat globalization, if voters want anti-establishment more than establishment, shouldn't Bernie have won?

Well, it was quite clear that DNC turned against Bernie from the start of the campaign for the primaries.

If the DNC hadn't rigged the primary, Bernie would have beaten Trump in a landslide.

From what I understand (which is based on Clay Shirky's Twitter feed, make of that what you will) Bernie had zero appeal to black voters, who are an essential demographic for the Democrats. He was very popular in a young, white bubble, which is also important, but still a bubble.

Bernie almost won.

In some ways the DNC presented a larger challenge to Bernie than the RNC did for Trump.

Reply on news.ycombinator.com