"Trump's supporters are the Religious Right without the Religion" (see OP)

[Blue3]

"Trump's supporters are the Religious Right without the Religion."

I heard this on the news the other day, from an analyst on one of the news channels, forget their name.

What they meant was: the "populist voice" of the Republican Party used to be the Religious Right. But with changing demographics and serious blows, religion-driven social conservatism and organized religious devotion in general have been on decline in the United States.

Many progressives and some Establishment Republicans and Younger Republicans had been hoping for this, wondering what would take the place of the populist "Religious Right" once the religious fervor of the last few decades finally started to fade away. Waiting for it to be replaced by something else.

And the answer? Donald Trump, and his fanbase.




Agree/disagree?

[Hillary pays minimum wage]

I can agree with this.

[Ljube]

I can agree with this.

[Virginiá]

Part of the power of the religious right was the ability to influence political activities at a place where people met regularly and consistently, and actually listened/trusted the opinions of the people there. I'm not sure how this working class uprising is supposed to sustain itself in a similar fashion. Meeting at bars and nascar events to discuss politics?

But to be fair, as much as I hate Trump, I've never disagreed that he will have a lasting effect on the GOP and a certain block of voters. I just don't think it will last much longer than a decade or so.

[Ljube]

Part of the power of the religious right was the ability to influence political activities at a place where people met regularly and consistently, and actually listened/trusted the opinions of the people there. I'm not sure how this working class uprising is supposed to sustain itself in a similar fashion. Meeting at bars and nascar events to discuss politics?

But to be fair, as much as I hate Trump, I've never disagreed that he will have a lasting effect on the GOP and a certain block of voters. I just don't think it will last much longer than a decade or so.

Why do you hate TRUMP?

[Virginiá]

Why do you hate TRUMP?

Because he's acting like a moron. Notice I said acting. I think he's smart, but he's using terrible tactics to win and stirring up a lot of hate in the process. This bs he has created isn't just going to instantly go away when the race is over.

I also find this "I can't be bought" idea laughably absurd. He was the kind of guy doing the buying to begin with, and to think he won't be bought out just because he is rich is stupid. He may not need money, but he could want other things. Or more money. Or just feel like doling out favors for future leverage.

He may think this is a game, or just dicking around otherwise to keep himself occupied, but he is having a negative effect on this country and I think he knows this.

[Sprouts Farmers Market ✘]

The Religious Right is largely wealthy and could care less about Trump's economic proposals as they would probably be better benefited by the reverse from Jeb or someone. They were also big fans of Huckabee's humanitarian approach to immigration back in the day. That's the danger in simplifying everything into socially conservative and what not because much of this isn't the same policies that Evangelicals support.

[Ljube]

Why do you hate TRUMP?

Because he's acting like a moron. Notice I said acting. I think he's smart, but he's using terrible tactics to win and stirring up a lot of hate in the process. This bs he has created isn't just going to instantly go away when the race is over.

I also find this "I can't be bought" idea laughably absurd. He was the kind of guy doing the buying to begin with, and to think he won't be bought out just because he is rich is stupid. He may not need money, but he could want other things. Or more money. Or just feel like doling out favors for future leverage.

He may think this is a game, or just dicking around otherwise to keep himself occupied, but he is having a negative effect on this country and I think he knows this.

Yes. He is acting like a moron. But that's all act, as you realize yourself.
He hasn't created any BS. That BS already existed.
Again, we have mixing up cause and effect.

The anger and hate were already there. TRUMP just used them to further his chances of winning the nomination.

He is the least likely candidate to be bought, while your Hillary is the most likely. So that's no argument against TRUMP.

I think TRUMP is having a positive effect on this country. If all he accomplishes is just the death of PC police, then he has done a great service to liberty.

[Hillary pays minimum wage]

One thing Trump isn't likely to do is be bought out as he has enough money.  If anything he'll get endorsements because people are afraid his monopolies will help them.

[Virginiá]

Yes. He is acting like a moron. But that's all act, as you realize yourself.

Yes, and coupled with his desire to use those moronic actions to win an election is distasteful to say the least.

He hasn't created any BS. That BS already existed.

That doesn't change anything. If a minority of this country wants to deport 11 million people, fine, but I'm so glad it will never happen because that is a horrible thing to do to people. Some of those people have lived here for years, decades even. Other citizens have family members who may be here illegally, or friends, or other relatives. It's just wrong, and now he's making it a thing. And the vast majority of them aren't rapists. They are as hard working as any other American. Shame on him.

So I'm not really mixing up anything. I would have to think that the mere existence of those feelings absolves him, which I don't.

He is the least likely candidate to be bought, while your Hillary is the most likely. So that's no argument against TRUMP.

It's not like I'm saying that I think Clinton is unbuyable - Far from it. My comments on that were a side rant on how ridiculous I find people mentioning his ability to be bought. I happen to find him just as bribable as anyone else, but that he would probably do it for different reasons.

I find enough reasons to hate him - Mainly for what I perceive to be the damage he is doing to the country, which I take to heart. Maybe you don't see it as damage.. Fine, but I do. You're not going to convince me otherwise. I've had similar conversations quite a number of times and the only thing it's convinced me of is how dedicated some people are to getting people to see the light on Trump (Not saying you are, but I've seen others really try to make converts out of people).

[Ljube]

I find enough reasons to hate him - Mainly for what I perceive to be the damage he is doing to the country, which I take to heart. Maybe you don't see it as damage.. Fine, but I do. You're not going to convince me otherwise. I've had similar conversations quite a number of times and the only thing it's convinced me of is how dedicated some people are to getting people to see the light on Trump (Not saying you are, but I've seen others really try to make converts out of people).

It seems we're seeing the same light. Nothing to convince you about.

[Beezer]

Christian conservatives are driven by concerns about abortion and gay rights, ie traditional culture war issues. Contrary to popular belief they're also strong supporters of the GOP's economic policies. Trump's supporters seem to have more in common with European right-wing populist voters. Working class, perhaps even slightly leftist economic positions (by GOP standards), galvanized by rhetoric about immigration and concerns about national identity.

[wolfsblood07]

Yes.  Donald Trump's message is very similar to the message Pat Buchanan ran on in Republican primaries in 1992 and 1996, but without the religious component.  Buchanan is a devout Catholic, and made opposition to the radical and immoral gay agenda a focal point.  On economic issues they are on the same page.

[SillyAmerican]

That doesn't change anything. If a minority of this country wants to deport 11 million people, fine, but I'm so glad it will never happen because that is a horrible thing to do to people. Some of those people have lived here for years, decades even. Other citizens have family members who may be here illegally, or friends, or other relatives. It's just wrong, and now he's making it a thing. And the vast majority of them aren't rapists. They are as hard working as any other American. Shame on him.

So just to be clear, you are in favor of us ignoring our own immigration laws? I'm sorry, but whether or not a person here illegally is hard working, friendly, related to others, someone who's lived here peacefully for years or decades, or a model non-citizen, the fact remains that he/she is here illegally. Either the laws should change, or we should enforce them. Period.

And a correction to your statement: "They are as hard working as any other American" should read "They often work harder than any American, even though they are not American".

See, people who make these folks Americans in their heads do nothing to address the problem; in fact, it's what's allowed the problem to become so bad...

[Torie]

This slinging around and conflating of the terms populist and religious and right, I don't think is helpful. Populism is its own thing, and populists may or may not be religious. I really don't think that at any time, populism and being religious tended to be highly correlated, except to the extent that being poorer and being religious tended to be correlated. Trump's appeal is populist, mixed with those looking for a strongman personality, a daddy figure, to restore order. Those looking for such, may or may not be religious. That is beside the point, for those emphasizing populist concerns, and/or the need for a strong, kick ass leader.

Cruz's appeal is more of a mixed bag, in part because Cruz has morphed from being a kind of libertarian, to a libertarian that now has the sartorial presentation of a culture warrior, seasoned with some tough talk about making the sand glow where our enemies repose themselves, just to reassure folks he won't be a pussy abroad, as libertarians are sometimes wont to be.

Where both candidates are so similar, is that they have dumbed it all down, as if the public square were a remedial classroom for the mentally challenged and/or those who to date haven't shown up much to class, or slept through class.

[Virginiá]

So just to be clear, you are in favor of us ignoring our own immigration laws?

Pretty much, yes. At least in regards to deporting that many people. They wouldn't have to be deported if conservatives didn't keep blocking immigration reform, either. So it's not exactly like I'm a rogue outlier with fringe views. Most of this country doesn't want to see a mass deportation, either.

Are there any other things you would like to lecture me on? Because that's two in a row in the same morning now. I have lots of views that would probably irk your traditional sensibilities!

[Cryptic]

I think its a little too soon to say for certain if Trump supporters are gonna take the Religious Right's place or not. I can certainly see it happening, but I think we should wait to see if the same coalition of voters comes out in force next cycle before making judgments.

[Sprouts Farmers Market ✘]

This slinging around and conflating of the terms populist and religious and right, I don't think is helpful. Populism is its own thing, and populists may or may not be religious. I really don't think that at any time, populism and being religious tended to be highly correlated, except to the extent that being poorer and being religious tended to be correlated. Trump's appeal is populist, mixed with those looking for a strongman personality, a daddy figure, to restore order. Those looking for such, may or may not be religious. That is beside the point, for those emphasizing populist concerns, and/or the need for a strong, kick ass leader.

Cruz's appeal is more of a mixed bag, in part because Cruz has morphed from being a kind of libertarian, to a libertarian that now has the sartorial presentation of a culture warrior, seasoned with some tough talk about making the sand glow where our enemies repose themselves, just to reassure folks he won't be a pussy abroad, as libertarians are sometimes wont to be.

Where both candidates are so similar, is that they have dumbed it all down, as if the public square were a remedial classroom for the mentally challenged and/or those who to date haven't shown up much to class, or slept through class.

Ummm, no? I mean, you can say the poor are more spiritual, but thr rural poor are spiritual without going to church or anything. Church attendance correlates with higher incomes. The non-church attending Christians are not part of what religious refers to in this country.

It's clear you just want this to be true so you can show superiority over poor people once again through your lack of religion and laugh at those who believe for being uneducated morons.

[Virginiá]

It's clear you just want this to be true so you can show superiority over poor people once again through your lack of religion and laugh at those who believe for being uneducated morons.

This is basically the last thing I could ever see Torie thinking or wanting.

[Sprouts Farmers Market ✘]

It's clear you just want this to be true so you can show superiority over poor people once again through your lack of religion and laugh at those who believe for being uneducated morons.

This is basically the last thing I could ever see Torie thinking or wanting.

Torie is one of the biggest elitists on the whole forum, lol

[TJ in Oregon]

I think there is a connection between trump support and the decline of religion in the US but it's not so much that there must always be a right populist movement. Instead I think trump has a following because people are insecure. We're insecure for a variety of reasons, some economic and some social. We've lost the concept of community and we've lost a healthy respect for western civilization. This combined with economic struggle has created the current beast.

We've lost our sense of community over the years and become so individualistic that we're insecure. You can see it with the safe space mentality and you can see it with trump himself. We take criticism personally because (a) we're not used to getting it and (b) we don't have the social support to cope. Religion is a vehicle that offers both (or at least ought to offer both and when it doesn't, it is also part of the problem). The other factor here is that our society has become so craven toward money and advancement that we don't care about people. We don't know our neighbors, view our communities as transient, etc. Despite having the ability to be more connected than ever before, we're more isolated than ever before. We get angry and insecure and some of us turn to a thuggish strongman to allegedly be the savior.

The other factor is that we've lost a healthy respect for our country and more broadly for western civilizations. Unfortunately much of American multiculturalism has been driven not because its advocates like other cultures but because they hate their own. We're left with a society that has no broadly acceptable culture or identity. This apparently provoked a reaction, not in favor of restoring our own concept of culture, but jealousy toward other cultures that haven't destroyed theirs. And then every time President Obama says something like a shooting was really workplace violence rather than Islamic terrorism in the name of preventing a backlash against Muslims, he feeds the flames of the nihilistic mob. Again we get angry and insecure and some of us turn to a thuggish strongman to allegedly be the savior.

What seems really strange is the extent that trump has managed to create a cult of personality around himself. Absolute consistency is expected from everyone else running or else they are clearly political apparatchiks with no sincerity. But no one can dare demand consistency from their own leader without being pelted with nasty insults. Allegedly the way to deprogram a cult member is to point out inconsistencies in their leader and ideology but that doesn't seem to be getting us anywhere, or if anyone has even tried it. There will come a day when trump's nastiness comes back to bit him; it's just a question of how much he does before that point.

[TJ in Oregon]

This slinging around and conflating of the terms populist and religious and right, I don't think is helpful. Populism is its own thing, and populists may or may not be religious. I really don't think that at any time, populism and being religious tended to be highly correlated, except to the extent that being poorer and being religious tended to be correlated. Trump's appeal is populist, mixed with those looking for a strongman personality, a daddy figure, to restore order. Those looking for such, may or may not be religious. That is beside the point, for those emphasizing populist concerns, and/or the need for a strong, kick ass leader.

Cruz's appeal is more of a mixed bag, in part because Cruz has morphed from being a kind of libertarian, to a libertarian that now has the sartorial presentation of a culture warrior, seasoned with some tough talk about making the sand glow where our enemies repose themselves, just to reassure folks he won't be a pussy abroad, as libertarians are sometimes wont to be.

Where both candidates are so similar, is that they have dumbed it all down, as if the public square were a remedial classroom for the mentally challenged and/or those who to date haven't shown up much to class, or slept through class.

Ummm, no? I mean, you can say the poor are more spiritual, but thr rural poor are spiritual without going to church or anything. Church attendance correlates with higher incomes. The non-church attending Christians are not part of what religious refers to in this country.

It's clear you just want this to be true so you can show superiority over poor people once again through your lack of religion and laugh at those who believe for being uneducated morons.

You know, Torie's not the first to make that argument. Jesus did :

You must be logged in to read this quote.

[Torie]

It's clear you just want this to be true so you can show superiority over poor people once again through your lack of religion and laugh at those who believe for being uneducated morons.

This is basically the last thing I could ever see Torie thinking or wanting.

Thank you. The charge is ludicrous. I have never made a post ever putting down persons of faith. Not one. I was just making what I thought was a statistically accurate statement. And obviously there are  many wealthy people of faith, and poorer folks with no faith.

[Sprouts Farmers Market ✘]

It's clear you just want this to be true so you can show superiority over poor people once again through your lack of religion and laugh at those who believe for being uneducated morons.

This is basically the last thing I could ever see Torie thinking or wanting.

Thank you. The charge is ludicrous. I have never made a post ever putting down persons of faith. Not one. I was just making what I thought was a statistically accurate statement. And obviously there are  many wealthy people of faith, and poorer folks with no faith.

It's not about putting down the religious, it's about putting down the poor by distinguishing yourself from them.

My point is that your statement is factually incorrect about American demographics.

[Torie]

It's clear you just want this to be true so you can show superiority over poor people once again through your lack of religion and laugh at those who believe for being uneducated morons.

This is basically the last thing I could ever see Torie thinking or wanting.

Thank you. The charge is ludicrous. I have never made a post ever putting down persons of faith. Not one. I was just making what I thought was a statistically accurate statement. And obviously there are  many wealthy people of faith, and poorer folks with no faith.

It's not about putting down the religious, it's about putting down the poor by distinguishing yourself from them.

My point is that your statement is factually incorrect about American demographics.

I have never made a post putting down the poor either, as opposed to sometimes being snarky about certain life style choices, or sometimes the ignorance of it all. In fact, in many ways, the poor in this country are treated very poorly, particularly when it comes to their educational options. 

Anyway, why don't we stick to the facts (your second sentence has the potential to lead to something constructive, while your first sentence is the kind of thing that leads to stupid flame wars), rather than impugning other people's motives. Thank you.