Opponents of Donald Trump suggest that his supporters are motivated by racism, e.g., Trump’s proposal to favor non-Muslim immigrants and to attempt to restrict illegal immigration.
Why couldn’t Trump supporters be motivated instead by a desire to see a President who wasn’t looking to cash in on the back-end?
Let’s consider the Clintons. They presided over an immensely powerful government whose actions benefited some private citizens and corporations more than others (see the 1999 repeal of the Glass-Steagall Act, for example). It seems that some private citizens and corporations have seen fit to give the Clintons more than $100 million in speaking fees in the years since they left public office.
How about Barack Obama? Over the years, Obamacare should add literally hundreds of billions of dollars to the revenue of insurance companies and health care providers (for what other industry is it illegal for a consumer to decline to purchase the product?). Following his departure from office, could Obama make hundreds of millions of dollars giving talks to medical associations, hospital executives, and insurance companies? If so, doesn’t that function as a payoff for services rendered?
A vote for Trump may be many things but why can’t it be a vote to shut this system down? Though he seems to have inflated his wealth to some extent he is unarguably at least a moderately rich bastard. Thus a typical voter might hope that he wouldn’t want to sell out his fellow citizens in order to benefit a corporate or individual from whom he in turns hopes to get cash post-Presidency.
I’m always amused by term “repeal of Glass-Steagal Act”. The correct term that should be used is “enactment of the Gramm–Leach–Bliley Act (GLBA)”. Let’s give the proper people the infamous credit they deserve for this bad legislation.
Trump has plenty of business interests and “friends” who I’m sure would color some of his decisions and directions. He also has taken nearly $10M in campaign contributions despite making some noise about being self funding. His campaign that doesn’t need donations has (IIRC) three donate buttons on the front page of the web site.
Also the Obamacare requirement to purchase insurance is really no different from requiring you to carry homeowners insurance and car insurance. A percentage of people would decide they don’t need it or would rather spend the money on cigarettes, but when their choice turns bad they don’t accept the consequences of being sick or injured and not being able to afford care. They’ll still show up at the emergency room and then stiff the hospital on the bill, which means everyone else pays part of it. That by the way is the definition of socialism.
Politicians get very low pay for the job they do. While they’re weasels and I hate pork and those who jump from one political job to another when their term expires, book and speaking deals after they leave office are a form of compensation for dealing with low pay and a high pressure job. I doubt you fix this by electing one guy as president for four years.
“the Obamacare requirement to purchase insurance is really no different from requiring you to carry homeowners insurance and car insurance.”
ObamaCar requires us to buy a car, register it, and buy insurance? It is now illegal to use Uber or public transit?
ObamaHouse requires us to buy a house? It is illegal to rent? What state or federal law requires current homeowners to be a customer of a private homeowners insurer?
There is no evidence that Trump’s support is a function of voters concerned about politicians cashing in at the back end. Nor is there any evidence that Trump would be less greedy than Clinton. He has been willing to put his name on most anything to make a buck.
Illegal immigrants and Muslims are not a race.
If so, doesn’t that function as a payoff for services rendered?
Sure it’s euphemistically referred to as “Obamacare,” but Congressional Democrats overwhelmingly passed it and are responsible for it coming to life. Oh, and USSC Justice John Roberts. Maybe these folks are the ones that should be due the post-government service multi-million dollar windfalls.
@CFB: Also the Obamacare requirement to purchase insurance is really no different from requiring you to carry homeowners insurance and car insurance.
Good point; though, while the State requires auto insurance, the homeowner’s lender requires homeowner’s insurance. I purchased my last three homes w/o financing in an effort to forego the lender’s insurance requirement. I put a few hundred away each month as self-insurance. I did, however, recently buy a $1 million personal liability policy on my rental property from Loyd’s of London. Although, on the other hand, I was recently denied a homeowner’s equity line of credit because I didn’t have homeowner’s insurance.
All Republicans except Trump seem to be firmly in the pocket of one sponsor or another. Clinton is such a ridiculous case of love for sale, with bribes flowing into the CGI from all over the world (even nice, pure Sweden, as it happens). It seems impossible for an intelligent person not on the take to vote for her with a straight face.
Perhaps the sole alternative to voting Trump is to do like Phil and vote Sanders? Or stay home, of course.
Phil,
You asked in what other industry is it illegal to decline to purchase a product.
Answer: Auto insurance.
In Virginia, a person is required by law to pay an uninsured motorist fee if they do not purchase auto insurance.
Yes, both Trump and Sanders get a lot of support from people partially because they are not owned by donors.
‘politicians on deferred corporate payrolls’ – yep. kasich us congress 1983-2001. lehman brothers director w/ 0 2001-2008 (lol). us congress is essentially equivalent to banking experience, right?
Mark-
You don’t have to own a car, so you don’t have to buy auto insurance.
Re: auto insurance, I think one concept that keeps getting forgotten is that you are probably required to purchase liability insurance (that is, to cover damage you may do with your vehicle to others), and possibly comprehensive coverage if you don’t own your vehicle (that is, the bank is letting you drive their vehicle while you pay them back), but I’m not aware of any law that requires you to insure your fully-owned vehicle to pay yourself if it is damaged or destroyed.