Whatever Trump-followers call themselves (Trumpanistas, Trump Troops, Trumpsters, etc) they are aggressive in their defense of the billionaire celebrity presidential candidate. Why?
Most say they idolize Trump because he is strong, stands up for his principles, is a great business man and tells it like it is. Why then do Donald’s supporters feel the need to ardently attack anyone that disagrees with him? Can’t this amazing leader of people do that himself? Is not his character so bullet-proof that no one, least not a “bimbo”, could damage it?
Disillusion is likely the cause.
- disappointment resulting from the discovery that something is not as good as one believed it to be.
It is a grieving process. Disillusion brings about denial, anger, bargaining, depression and ultimately .. acceptance. As someone learns that their hero isn’t everything he or she thought, they first fight it off by denying that it ever happened, then get mad that they didn’t see it coming or that the hero let them down, then .. well, you get the point.
Trump fans are likely somewhere in-between these first two stages. They erroneously believe he won the debate on Thursday night and that he rightfully beat-down a thoughtful and hard-working female anchor for asking him “unfair” questions.
Trump and his supporters point at easily-swayed online polls to claim victory. Ron and Rand Paul saw similar huge online poll wins after debates due to their ardent, but small, armies of followers. It never amounted to much more than an also-ran in the nomination fight. Online polls don’t accurately reflect voter sentiment – probably because Americans don’t elect their politicians via social media – yet.
When Trump’s top campaign advisor, Roger Stone, left the campaign yesterday, it was reportedly over Trump’s unwillingness to accept that online polls weren’t scientific – despite the evidence to the contrary – and his discourteous attacks on Megyn Kelly:
Stone: “Donald, stop with the Megyn Kelly shit. It’s fucking crazy. It’s killing us.”
Trump: “What do you mean? I won the debate. People loved it.”
Stone: “You didn’t win the debate.”
Trump: “Yes I did. Look at the polling. Look at Drudge.”
Stone: “The Drudge Report poll isn’t a scientific poll. You won’t give me the money to pay for a scientific poll. And you’re off-message.”
Donald seems unwilling to listen to anyone that disagrees with him – a narrow-minded approach at best, eerily reminiscent of Obama at worst. The exchange also shows that Trump is either broke or does not want to know what internal polling might show him – the truth. Internal polls are scientific surveys paid for by campaigns so that campaign operations can understand how the voters are actually responding to their messages and actions. By not polling independently, Trump seems ready to run his campaign based on blog polls from every dark corner of the internet which has worked … never.
Stone said he left over Donald’s handling of Kelly and the fact that Trump is losing it. Roger said, “He is losing his grip on reality. He has these yes-men around him. And now he’s living in a parallel world.” Again, the similarities to President Obama are hard to miss, but not because of a shared political ideology. The parallel is due to a similar … narcissism.
Trump supporters also seem unwilling to see Trump vetted. Many of those same people were angry when the media failed to ask tough questions of candidate Obama. If they firmly believe that Trump is the best candidate for President, then having a seasoned anchor ask him some tough questions should not be an issue. If he’s elected .. the issues and questions won’t get easier and he won’t simply be able to call them names and storm away.
Trump has flip-flopped on abortion, gun rights and more. While conservatives were quick to question Obama or Clinton’s “evolving” on important issues, they readily accept Trump’s modifications on central ideals. But, hypocrisy is what it is, no matter which side is doing it.
About Trump’s supposed fight against political correctness: It’s witchcraft. He uses the non-PC label to allow himself to make inane and insulting remarks. Talking about a news anchor bleeding out of “wherever” isn’t about ridding ourselves of the re-interpreted definitions of words by the left. Kinetic action, workplace violence, equal vs. same, spouse vs. partner, abortion vs. murder, micro-aggression, .. etc .. there are many P.C. things that need dealing with, but do we really need someone to boldly stand up and call a woman a bimbo?
To Trump’s credit, sure, Americans want the illegal immigration issue solved. Whether it’s by Trump’s big wall with a beautiful door or by fixing the craptastic legal immigration system currently in-place and going after employers that hire illegals – it should be fixed. That isn’t even in the same zip code as allowing a prospective leader of the free world to act like a Jerry Springer guest every time someone asks him a tough question or otherwise slights him. A President smiles, nods and courteously rebuts the criticism. Name-calling and personal attacks are for reality T.V. and the schoolyard.
Trump has managed to offend many groups in recent weeks and he’ll tell you he doesn’t care. It may not be long until Donald starts calling conservative voters all sorts of colorful names if actual scientific polls show a downward trend for his campaign. Then again, it will never be his fault. Another parallel?