Analysis Poll | Trump voters don’t have buyer’s remorse. But some Hillary Clinton voters do. - Polidicks

[QUOTE=Dr. Evilcop;52142099]I imagine that if Hillary hadn't been the opposition, far more people would have regretted voting for Trump. When the election comes down to two extremely shitty choices I can see why people wouldn't regret their choice even if that person does a shitty job after getting elected. Meanwhile regretful Hillary supporters are probably wishing they voted for somebody else in the primaries so that this wouldn't have happened. Hillary lost completely and utterly through her own incompetence and most people can see that now.[/QUOTE] See I don't think so. I think a lot of the people that voted for Trump voted for him because of his ideals and his plans, as well as his no bullshit take on everything. Even if Trump hadn't won I wouldn't feel remorse for not voting for another candidate. I want the point to get across that there's a large percentage of Americans who agree with his ideals and how he wants to run things. Did people vote for him purely because they were tired of the Democrat's way of running things? Sure. I think a larger percentage voted because of the way he connected with us. Not to mention the fact that he's entirely anti-PC. Why the fuck are people so offended nowadays over the smallest shit? We [b]can't[/b] say [i]this[/i] word but we [b]can[/b] say a word that means the exact same thing but is 3 words fucking longer, all so some people can feel good about themselves. The anti-pc actually was a big homerunner for me, it connects to me because I'm so frustrated that I can't say something because it [i]might[/i] offend someone. I will go out of my way to say that shit anyway, and you can call me an asshole for it, I don't give a fuck I'm not here to appease you I'm here to say what a LOT of people are thinking that they're too afraid of. My girlfriend will cover my mouth for FEAR of someone being offended about what I say, but guess what? Nobody is offended. Nobody will confront me about it. If I ask people what I said was offensive so I can stop saying it around them, they say it's fine. My theory is that a lot of people agree with what I say, they're just afraid that if they say it they'll get a social backlash. People will yell and scream at you for what you're saying even if deep down they believe it too, they just don't want to be looked at in a different light because of some extreme left fucktards declaring you can't say or do this. If everyone just spoke their minds we would really see how people felt about things. Don't be afraid of the social backlash, just say it and repeat what I said above. And going back to that whole buyers remorse, while we (trump supporters) may not agree with the WAY he's doing it, we agree with what he WANTS to accomplish. And that sets the mood for future presidents, they will see what the people wanted, and they will act accordingly. (Hopefully) [editline]23rd April 2017[/editline] [QUOTE=Raidyr;52142411]I'll just straight up ask Trump supporters who have already posted in this thread like Tudd and Ralgoman: Do you give a shit whether I pay for the wall or Mexico pays for the wall as long as the wall goes up?[/QUOTE] Let me first start with saying I agree with the building of the wall. I'd rather of course that Mexico pays for the wall itself without ever touching taxpayers pockets, but of course that won't happen. If us Americans have to foot the bill that's fine by me, so long as Mexico reimburses in the long run with increased trade tariffs.

[QUOTE=CanUBe;52142532]Yes Tudd, Trump created a very effective (and scary) cult of personality which many people - including yourself - bought into. Congratulations for being fooled, I guess?[/QUOTE] I'm not sure any canidate was free of a cult of personality except for the lesser ones. Even Hillary had the "It's her turn" now crowd and the Bernie Bro culture had some odd heights of viewing Bernie in such an peddle-stool way. I can tell you that trump supporters I converse with see the world in a completely different way than how people on here generally react.

[QUOTE=Tudd;52142563]I'm still inclined to support the wall going up even out of domestic expense, but I do care in the sense that I believe Mexico pays for it as a way out of their trade deficit with us. If it ends up that we foot the whole bill, it would be incredibly disappointing, but I still believe in a stronger border and thus wouldn't be bothered by it to say I have "buyer's remorse" even. So maybe that gives you some insight on the tolerances a Trump Supporter might have on the reality of Trump's Administration past promises. You being taxed on it? I mean I kinda care in the way that I know you don't support it, but that is taxes in a nutshell for a variety of issues/projects people don't support. It is probably the same amount caring you might have for me if I started my rant on how retarded it is we subsidize R&D energy companies with 40% of our energy budget under Obama and only put 7% in Nuclear, despite Nuclear being a technology we can use today to fix our environmental woes. In my opinion, showing how the left can be just as skeptic/anti-science as the right on certain issues.[/QUOTE] Thanks for the honest answer. I didn't mean to make it personal. Replace "I" with "average low income American". I support stronger borders too so I personally wouldn't mind [I]too much[/I] if my taxes went into it, but you have to admit it's a bit fucked up if that actually happens [editline]23rd April 2017[/editline] [QUOTE=Tudd;52142589]I'm not sure any canidate was free of a cult of personality except for the lesser ones. Even Hillary had the "It's her turn" now crowd and the Bernie Bro culture had some odd heights of viewing Bernie in such an peddle-stool way.[/QUOTE] Sure, but not to the same extent. I think it's easily observable that both Sanders and Clinton attracted a lot of flak from lefists and moderates on opposite lines of the intra-party divide. The Trump cult of personality is larger, more encompassing, and apparently more zealous. [QUOTE=Tudd;52142589]I can tell you that trump supporters I converse with see the world in a completely different way than how people on here generally react.[/QUOTE] Can you at least understand why people who don't support the wall to begin might be upset with Trumps decision to ask for a $1.4 billion startup? Do you ever get the impression that you don't get honest pushback from people who don't support Trump and the only criticisms you read come filtered through caricature?

[QUOTE=Raidyr;52142590]Thanks for the honest answer. I didn't mean to make it personal. Replace "I" with "average low income American". I support stronger borders too so I personally wouldn't mind [I]too much[/I] if my taxes went into it, but you have to admit it's a bit fucked up if that actually happens [editline]23rd April 2017[/editline] Sure, but not to the same extent. I think it's easily observable that both Sanders and Clinton attracted a lot of flak from lefists and moderates on opposite lines of the intra-party divide. The Trump cult of personality is larger, more encompassing, and apparently more zealous. Can you at least understand why people who don't support the wall to begin might be upset with Trumps decision to ask for a $1.4 billion startup?[/QUOTE] I mean from a campaign promise stand-point it is fucked much like many promises made on campaigns, but obviously if you supported stronger borders before Trump's "Mexico will pay for it" stance, then you probably already envisioned taxes were going to pay for that stronger border.

[QUOTE=Derek_SM;52142567] Let me first start with saying I agree with the building of the wall. I'd rather of course that Mexico pays for the wall itself without ever touching taxpayers pockets, but of course that won't happen. If us Americans have to foot the bill that's fine by me, so long as Mexico reimburses in the long run with increased trade tariffs.[/QUOTE] Thanks for the honest reply. To the people wondering why Trump supporters like being lied to, they don't. They just understand that "and Mexico will pay for it" was the sugar meant to help the medicine down. Mexico paying for it would be nice, but if they don't, they don't mind paying for it themselves. [editline]23rd April 2017[/editline] [QUOTE=Tudd;52142610]I mean from a campaign promise stand-point it is fucked much like many promises made on campaigns, but obviously if you supported stronger borders before Trump's "Mexico will pay for it" stance, then you probably already envisioned taxes were going to pay for that stronger border.[/QUOTE] You can occupy both stances. Not every reaction to what Trump does has to be violent backwards recoil or blind support.

[QUOTE=Tudd;52142563]In my opinion, showing how the left can be just as skeptic/anti-science as the right on certain issues.[/QUOTE] The left doesn't spend millions of dollars paying off scientists who deny climate change, or spreading false information about environmental data. They also aren't the ones who passed a bill saying coal companies can dump chemicals in our rivers and are actively dismantling the EPA. I haven't seen any democrats walk into the capital building holding a snowball as "proof" that climate change is a hoax. Don't even try to pretend that ani-science isn't a pillar of modern American conservatism by pulling the "both sides are equally bad" card. This is a pretty clear cut issue along party lines.

[QUOTE=Mr. Sarcastic;52142625]The left doesn't spend millions of dollars paying off scientists who deny climate change, or spreading false information about environmental data. They also aren't the ones who passed a bill saying coal companies can dump chemicals in our rivers and are actively dismantling the EPA. I haven't seen any democrats walk into the capital building holding a snowball as "proof" that climate change is a hoax. Don't even try to pretend that ani-science isn't a pillar of modern American conservatism by pulling the "both sides are equally bad" card. This is a pretty clear cut issue along party lines.[/QUOTE] No conservative I know believes this. There's dumbasses on both sides.

[QUOTE=Derek_SM;52142635]No conservative I know believes this. There's dumbasses on both sides.[/QUOTE] But your dimbasses are elected and in control and constantly making the situation worse but support for them isn't dropping Explanation?

[QUOTE=Mr. Sarcastic;52142625]The left doesn't spend millions of dollars paying off scientists who deny climate change, or spreading false information about environmental data. [/quote] Actually the left regularly funds/skews data in its favor to push for R&D projects or hype up predictions to the max to create demand for environmental programs that are regularly reigned in for being far too baseless. There is a reason the Inconvenient Truth had to revise its assertions [url=http://abcnews.go.com/US/TenWays/story?id=3719791]by legal means[/url] on some issues. [quote] They also aren't the ones who passed a bill saying coal companies can dump chemicals in our rivers and are actively dismantling the EPA. [/quote] They do make bills and regulations on nuclear power that are based on irrational fears despite calling for immediate action against climate change. The Anti-vaccine/Anti-GMO groups are also largely left-leaning despite also being against the scientific consensus. [quote] Don't even try to pretend that ani-science isn't a pillar of modern American conservatism by pulling the "both sides are equally bad" card. This is a pretty clear cut issue along party lines.[/QUOTE] It is certainly less one-sided as you are implying though, and no I don't think it is clear at all, it changes issue to issue. [editline]23rd April 2017[/editline] [quote] Sure, but not to the same extent. I think it's easily observable that both Sanders and Clinton attracted a lot of flak from lefists and moderates on opposite lines of the intra-party divide. The Trump cult of personality is larger, more encompassing, and apparently more zealous. [/quote] Sure the scales are way different per candidate on these cults of personality. Trump's obviously has far more zealous and fervent supporters than Hillary, although I would argue Bernie's supporters were quite zealous too for example. Doesn't help that Trump is quite memey and meme culture is pretty much propaganda in the modern world. [quote] Can you at least understand why people who don't support the wall to begin might be upset with Trumps decision to ask for a $1.4 billion startup? Do you ever get the impression that you don't get honest pushback from people who don't support Trump and the only criticisms you read come filtered through caricature?[/QUOTE] I totally understand why they might be upset. Though I am not sure by the last statement what you are suggesting. I read far more news criticizing Trump on a daily intake from new sources found on here for example.

[QUOTE=HumanAbyss;52142640]But your dimbasses are elected and in control and constantly making the situation worse but support for them isn't dropping Explanation?[/QUOTE] The people that vote them in may either not know the congressmen support these (which theres no excuse, knowledge is everywhere), may be picking based on other things and ignoring this, or picking the least evil. Then again they could also be dumbasses. Like I said, there's dumbasses on both sides. Anyway painting every conservative in this bad light isn't the way to go about things.

[QUOTE=Tudd;52142589]I'm not sure any canidate was free of a cult of personality except for the lesser ones. Even Hillary had the "It's her turn" now crowd and the Bernie Bro culture had some odd heights of viewing Bernie in such an peddle-stool way. I can tell you that trump supporters I converse with see the world in a completely different way than how people on here generally react.[/QUOTE] You say that while defending Trump despite breaking his promises?

[QUOTE=Lambeth;52142772]You say that while defending Trump despite breaking his promises?[/QUOTE] If you could list the promises he has broken, I can comment specifically on what I think of them. For example: Some would say the strike in Syria was broken promise (even the skeptical-right Trump supporters), but I didn't vote for Trump expecting him to be that isolationist to ignore a chemical attack or never intervene in the middle east.

[QUOTE=RenegadeCop;52142910]I think they just come out of the womb painted in bad light at this point, no one has to do it for them.[/QUOTE] There really wasn't a reason to post that though, was there? This is part of the divide between conservatives and liberals. Now to be fair I think everyone puts blanket term over each side, but thats usually when said verbally. On a forum there's no excuse dude, you have to think of something to say and then proceed to type and then hit that reply button. I'm not gonna hate on you for it, just quit it, we don't need these epic zingers to express discontent.

[QUOTE=Tudd;52142781]If you could list the promises he has broken, I can comment specifically on what I think of them. For example: Some would say the strike in Syria was broken promise (even the skeptical-right Trump supporters), but I didn't vote for Trump expecting him to be that isolationist to ignore a chemical attack or never intervene in the middle east.[/QUOTE] A broken promise you agree with is still a broken promise. Trump ran with a hands-off attitude towards Syria, promising to shift focus from Assad to ISIS. He bashed Obama for involving us in Syria. It's clearly a broken promise. What are "skeptical-right Trump" supporters? [QUOTE=Tudd;52142650] I totally understand why they might be upset. Though I am not sure by the last statement what you are suggesting. I read far more news criticizing Trump on a daily intake from new sources found on here for example.[/QUOTE] How much of that news do you think is genuine complaints? Even somewhat genuine, if exaggerated criticisms?

[QUOTE=Raidyr;52142938]A broken promise you agree with is still a broken promise. Trump ran with a hands-off attitude towards Syria, promising to shift focus from Assad to ISIS. He bashed Obama for involving us in Syria. It's clearly a broken promise. What are "skeptical-right Trump" supporters? How much of that news do you think is genuine complaints? Even somewhat genuine, if exaggerated criticisms?[/QUOTE] I mean yeah I guess so, but since we are (reluctantly) the world police and nobody else would do shit about it, it makes sense Trump would intervene. Other than chemical weapons I think we should just stay the fuck out and mind our own business. The United States has it's own troubles to worry about without sticking the Middle East into it.

[QUOTE=Derek_SM;52142567]Not to mention the fact that he's entirely anti-PC. Why the fuck are people so offended nowadays over the smallest shit? We [b]can't[/b] say [i]this[/i] word but we [b]can[/b] say a word that means the exact same thing but is 3 words fucking longer, all so some people can feel good about themselves. The anti-pc actually was a big homerunner for me, it connects to me because I'm so frustrated that I can't say something because it [i]might[/i] offend someone. I will go out of my way to say that shit anyway, and you can call me an asshole for it, I don't give a fuck I'm not here to appease you I'm here to say what a LOT of people are thinking that they're too afraid of. My girlfriend will cover my mouth for FEAR of someone being offended about what I say, but guess what? Nobody is offended. Nobody will confront me about it. If I ask people what I said was offensive so I can stop saying it around them, they say it's fine. My theory is that a lot of people agree with what I say, they're just afraid that if they say it they'll get a social backlash. People will yell and scream at you for what you're saying even if deep down they believe it too, they just don't want to be looked at in a different light because of some extreme left fucktards declaring you can't say or do this. If everyone just spoke their minds we would really see how people felt about things. Don't be afraid of the social backlash, just say it and repeat what I said above. [/QUOTE] I agree that the extreme ends of PC culture are definitely annoying, but how does that correlate with it being a good idea to vote for a candidate like Trump? Voting for candidates because of spite over cultural things like PC culture seems like it could start a slippery slope of people voting for extreme candidates just because they are a counter-act to whatever subsection of culture it is that people are currently annoyed at. Sure, Trump voters have their victory now, but what happens when/if the shoe turns on the other foot and people start voting in regressive left-wing candidates with poor qualifications as a response to the political/social climate under a Trump presidency? Is this a back and forth we really want to start, where we focus on culture wars over actual substance?

[QUOTE=BlindSniper17;52142976]I agree that the extreme ends of PC culture are definitely annoying, but how does that correlate with it being a good idea to vote for a candidate like Trump? Voting for candidates because of spite over cultural things like PC culture seems like it could start a slippery slope of people voting for extreme candidates just because they are a counter-act to whatever subsection of culture it is that people are currently annoyed at. Sure, Trump voters have their victory now, but what happens when/if the shoe turns on the other foot and people start voting in regressive left-wing candidates with poor qualifications as a response to the political/social climate under a Trump presidency? Is this a back and forth we really want to start, where we focus on culture wars over actual substance?[/QUOTE] It's a strong point that I think a lot of people agree with, but it's not the reason and shouldn't be the reason people voted him in for. The anti-pc is more akin to icing on the cake.

Hey if thinking the muslim ban is a bad idea is PC culture, I'm totally okay being a social justice warrior or whatever.

I only have remorse over voting for Hillary because I really wanted to keep Trump out of the white house and she was the closest to Bernie in terms of official policies. I would have voted for Gary Johnson to give 3rd parties a larger slice of the pie. Had I known that Hillary would have won the popular vote by more than 3 million votes and still gotten robbed, I probably wouldn't have voted at all

[QUOTE=Tudd;52142781]If you could list the promises he has broken, I can comment specifically on what I think of them. For example: Some would say the strike in Syria was broken promise (even the skeptical-right Trump supporters), but I didn't vote for Trump expecting him to be that isolationist to ignore a chemical attack or never intervene in the middle east.[/QUOTE] What is your opinion on trump's swamp draining abilities? Also why did you vote for trump?

[QUOTE=Raidyr;52142938]A broken promise you agree with is still a broken promise. Trump ran with a hands-off attitude towards Syria, promising to shift focus from Assad to ISIS. He bashed Obama for involving us in Syria. It's clearly a broken promise. [/quote] Doesn't mean he ever was an isolationist on the issue, just very non-interventionist, and I still think what he said holds true. Dealing with a chemical attack, regardless of location or circumstance, is a geopolitical event that requires intervention lest you want it to escalate in usage. Obama dealt with this issue horribly and that was the more non-interventionist path. When Trump actually starts calling for regime change or boots on the ground then I will call that a completely broken promise. Justified response to a chemical attack that the UN and world treaties have condone action against is a different matter. [quote] What are "skeptical-right Trump" supporters?[/quote] The Alex Jones, Paul Joesph Watson, and more libertarian-type Trump Supporters that voted for Trump under some assumption he was truly not going to intervene at all in anything. They are usually called the skeptic-right because of the first two big players and their conspiracy-oriented nature. The last group is libertarian, so by nature they are non-interventionist. [quote] How much of that news do you think is genuine complaints? Even somewhat genuine, if exaggerated criticisms?[/QUOTE] Very open ended question that depends on the issue really.

[QUOTE=Tudd;52143132]When Trump actually starts calling for regime change or boots on the ground then I will call that a completely broken promise. Justified response to a chemical attack that the UN and world treaties have condone action against is a different matter. .[/QUOTE] Yeah no, I'll believe it when I see it. The point of the cult he's got over all these Trumpets is the 'he can do no wrong' mindset. Is it not a broken promise when, during Obama's term, he blamed Obama for going golfing and doing more executive orders than usual - [I]whilst promising he wouldn't do that[/I] and then in his first 100 days goes on [B]more [/B]vacations and does [B]relatively more[/B] executive orders than him? How about when he promised he would start healing the political divide in this country in one of his first presidential speeches, then continuing to blame democrats for his failures and even admitting that he would blame democrats if Trumpcare didn't pass?

[QUOTE=Bertie;52141319]Everyone's realizing what a mess of a campaign Hillary pulled. Of course you'd want to ditch her, I'm putting Trump's victory squarely on her and her staff.[/QUOTE] She spent way too much time appealing to people that would vote for her anyway and just saying Trump is bad. (Gee professor what a shock.) What Democrats need is a plan to assist Americans stuck in areas where the industry leaving and never coming back resulted in towns that have become glorified heroin dens. Towns where that is already a reality or were facing that possibility are where the swing voters that gave Trump the election resided. They went for Trump on a hope that maybe, [I]just maybe[/I], he would actually force businesses like Carrier to stick around and breathe some life into their dying local economies, with that support being galvanized by no obvious alternative being offered by Hillary along with the 'deplorables' comment. And if Democrats already do have a plan to help these people then they need to ADVERTISE IT. The onus is on them to bring it to the attention of potential voters.

[QUOTE=Tudd;52143132]Doesn't mean he ever was an isolationist on the issue, just very non-interventionist, and I still think what he said holds true. Dealing with a chemical attack, regardless of location or circumstance, is a geopolitical event that requires intervention lest you want it to escalate in usage. Obama dealt with this issue horribly and that was the more non-interventionist path. When Trump actually starts calling for regime change or boots on the ground then I will call that a completely broken promise. Justified response to a chemical attack that the UN and world treaties have condone action against is a different matter.[/QUOTE] Once you start using phrases like "completely broken promise" you have practically already conceded that to a certain point, Trump backtracked on something he, if not outright promised, heavily suggested would be a part of his presidency. I actually fully support his bombing 100%. I think his foreign policy approach has been a lot better than Obama's. I'm with you Tudd, at least in that respect. But that is what I mean when I say you can agree with something Trump did, while at the same time recognizing that it doesn't exactly jive with what he was saying when he was looking for votes. [QUOTE=Tudd;52143132]The Alex Jones, Paul Joesph Watson, and more libertarian-type Trump Supporters that voted for Trump under some assumption he was truly not going to intervene at all in anything. They are usually called the skeptic-right because of the first two big players and their conspiracy-oriented nature. The last group is libertarian, so by nature they are non-interventionist.[/QUOTE] Where do you think they got that assumption? [QUOTE=Tudd;52143132]Very open ended question that depends on the issue really.[/QUOTE] I mean just generally. You say you read "far more news criticizing Trump" but do you actually read it and consider any of their points or do you just assume most if it, generally, is hogwash? I just get the sense from your posts, especially the one about the people you live having a different view on Trump than what you read here (and practically every other place on the internet?), that you just can't understand why people don't like him like you do.