Back in the 2016 election when he had just announced his candidacy, I recall being semi-interested in him after the first GOP debate, based strictly on his performance. His policies already sounded like racist trash (building the wall), BUT the appeal I saw from him was his apparent independent nature. He was a billionaire that wasn’t beholden to anybody, he could potentially reshape how everything was done in Washington, which has become so dysfunctional. He could work with both Democrats and Republicans (he was friends with the Clintons after all), maybe he was just running Republican, but he’d veer to the center after getting elected.
Obviously none of that came to pass and he’s just a fucking grifter who tried to become a dictator, but at the time that was the potential he had. It was an election where everybody wanted somebody who would make a big change. Sanders was far and above the best candidate to “shake things up” in DC, but then Democrats went with the most establishment candidate they could find.
I heard a lot of rhetoric (on Reddit) along the lines of “yeh, we’ve had politicians. What if we need a business man? Trump can run it like a business and make it efficient”.
Seemed fairly logical to me. As a non-american I hadn’t heard of him, wasn’t hugely into politics (let alone American politics).
I remember chatting with mates, and it came up, so I mentioned that perspective. Thankfully, they called me an idiot, described the actual character of trump, and why that was a terrible idea.
It wasn’t difficult to corroborate what they said, and suddenly the whole facade fell away in front of me. That coincided with t_d taking over Reddit, and it became painfully obvious none of it was in good faith nor organic.
Did no one pay attention to the news when he was just a real estate grifter? From a decade before, he was clearly without integrity, clearly skating across the line of legal, clearly not dealing fairly with those he did business with, clearly acting mostly in service to his own ego. I do see the appeal of a businessman to lead the country but not that approach to business
I never saw any of that.
2016 was a bit of a political awakening for me (well, maybe 2014, but it was a slow start).
I’m not from America so “Real Estate Crook” never crossed my path
then Democrats went with the most establishment candidate they could find.
Yeah, I’m really hoping for some more interesting Dem options soon. Probably not going to happen in 2024, but I’m hopeful for 2028. Biden has gotten a lot done, and I’m really thankful he has brought some decency and normalcy to the WH, but I’m still looking forward to other options.
I think this is the most logical argument I’ve heard about him in a while. Thanks for the perspective. I’ve hated him from the beginning, but this does explain a lot.
Sure but the point is that the billions didn’t come from the GOP so he wasn’t “owned” by them necessarily. Theoretically he would not be bound by any political party whereas other politicians are.
Back in the 2016 election when he had just announced his candidacy, I recall being semi-interested in him after the first GOP debate, based strictly on his performance. His policies already sounded like racist trash (building the wall), BUT the appeal I saw from him was his apparent independent nature. He was a billionaire that wasn’t beholden to anybody, he could potentially reshape how everything was done in Washington, which has become so dysfunctional. He could work with both Democrats and Republicans (he was friends with the Clintons after all), maybe he was just running Republican, but he’d veer to the center after getting elected.
Obviously none of that came to pass and he’s just a fucking grifter who tried to become a dictator, but at the time that was the potential he had. It was an election where everybody wanted somebody who would make a big change. Sanders was far and above the best candidate to “shake things up” in DC, but then Democrats went with the most establishment candidate they could find.
I heard a lot of rhetoric (on Reddit) along the lines of “yeh, we’ve had politicians. What if we need a business man? Trump can run it like a business and make it efficient”.
Seemed fairly logical to me. As a non-american I hadn’t heard of him, wasn’t hugely into politics (let alone American politics).
I remember chatting with mates, and it came up, so I mentioned that perspective. Thankfully, they called me an idiot, described the actual character of trump, and why that was a terrible idea.
It wasn’t difficult to corroborate what they said, and suddenly the whole facade fell away in front of me. That coincided with t_d taking over Reddit, and it became painfully obvious none of it was in good faith nor organic.
Did no one pay attention to the news when he was just a real estate grifter? From a decade before, he was clearly without integrity, clearly skating across the line of legal, clearly not dealing fairly with those he did business with, clearly acting mostly in service to his own ego. I do see the appeal of a businessman to lead the country but not that approach to business
I never saw any of that.
2016 was a bit of a political awakening for me (well, maybe 2014, but it was a slow start).
I’m not from America so “Real Estate Crook” never crossed my path
Yeah, I’m really hoping for some more interesting Dem options soon. Probably not going to happen in 2024, but I’m hopeful for 2028. Biden has gotten a lot done, and I’m really thankful he has brought some decency and normalcy to the WH, but I’m still looking forward to other options.
I think this is the most logical argument I’ve heard about him in a while. Thanks for the perspective. I’ve hated him from the beginning, but this does explain a lot.
Billionaire of someone else’s money. They is always strings attached to that sort of money
Sure but the point is that the billions didn’t come from the GOP so he wasn’t “owned” by them necessarily. Theoretically he would not be bound by any political party whereas other politicians are.
Turns out both are owned by the same and by each other