Hacker News Reader

Comment by rootusrootus | Hacker News Reader

That explains how he got almost half the votes on election night, but it does not explain the 1/3 that still to this day support him 100%. There is a pretty substantial underlying problem in play and Trump is the symptom, but the problem is deeper than a malfunctioning political system.

View on HN

That explains how he got the votes on election night in 2016. A vote for Grump in 2016 was completely understandable. But he should have plainly been a one term president, after his abjectly terrible handling of Covid (for starters, we needed leadership rather than dividership). But unfortunately in our upside-down world, Covid actually handed Grump a big excuse for why his first term was such an exercise in failure. And if there is one thing Grump is good at, it's weaseling responsibility onto others - a quality that his followers greatly admire as it soothes their own consciences as well.

> if there is one thing Grump is good at, it's weaseling responsibility onto others

That is true, I struggle to think of a single time he has taken responsibility for anything. But it works, his supporters actually believe that he is infallible and just can't get competent help. Or it's the deep state. Or something.

As an outsider is see i culture that is based on winning. Not on cooperation. That extends to politics. Were i live we are used to many parties and they must work together to form a working political system. This working together is pervasive throughout the society. This also means that individual idiots are kept in check.

It is almost unheard of in the US for an elected politician to poll lower than 30%, it seems to be a floor. This is for both parties, and all sorts of terrible behavior.

> almost unheard of in the US for an elected politician to poll lower than 30%, it seems to be a floor

Alan Keyes apparently set the floor at 27%, which is not far below 30%

> Obama vs. Alan Keyes. ... Keyes was plainly, obviously, completely crazy. But 27% of the population of Illinois voted for him. They put party identification, personal prejudice, whatever ahead of rational judgement.

https://kfmonkey.blogspot.com/2005/10/lunch-discussions-145-...

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/2004_United_States_Senate_elec...

And lizardman's Constant is 4% https://en.wiktionary.org/wiki/Lizardman%27s_Constant

To drive that home, Alan Keyes got to 27% by

- running against a charismatic Obama

- being a last minute insert when Jack Ryan was caught in a sex scandal (who was already fighting an uphill battle with sharing a last name with the corrupt former governor)

- being a carpetbagger (he didn't live in Illinois at any point until running for senate)

- running as a hard-line social conservative in a state where the GOP is torn between appealing to suburban Chicago fiscal conservatives and downstate Illinois social conservatives

And also being a person of colour, which is tough in the "hard-line social conservative" lane, where that is often a negative with those voters. Against another person of colour, who could pick up the other voters for whom it is a positive.

And the crazy.

Reply on news.ycombinator.com