Giving a platform to Trump supporters is how he got elected, The media is to blame for a madman in the White House and now you give him further a voice?
7
It's a dirty job to confront me with opinions which don't fit my point of view, but someone's got to do it.
Good to see the NYT is up to the job!
We need more of this, not less.
6
Trump fans, how's your 401k doing? Let's go to the charts.
Dow Jones Industrial Avg
Obama's first year: Up 34% (7949 to 10725)
Trump's first year: Up 31% (19799 to 25997)
2
The pro-Trump letters willfully overlook what is verifiably troubling about Trump: his incessant lying. How can we believe anything from a president who told over 100 outright lies in his first 10 months in office? Believing in Trump is like believing in that ultimate con man behind the curtain, the Wizard of Oz.
6
The most appalling part of the letters from the Trump voters is that although many mentioned that he is rude, crude, vulgar etc. none of them appeared to think that we should expect more than that from the president. None of them were concerned about the fact that he is a racist, misogynist, xenophobic, sexual harasser who is also a lying, ignorant, arrogant, and thin-skinned bully. He's also a five time bankrupt, stiffer of vendors and creditors, and con man who paid out $25 million to resolve the many suits against him for his fraudulent "Trump University."
They also display a total lack of interest in the fact that he has sought to undermine the press and justice department as well as the intelligence agencies. They show their lack of comprehension of how economics work in that they attribute the rise of the stock market and more employment to him as opposed to the fact that this economy is the Obama economy as he was the one who pulled the US back from the brink of another Great Depression after the crash that occurred in 2008 when the economy was in free-fall.
All I saw in those letters was a group of low information people with no focus on anything other than their own very small sphere of interest.
Sorry -- but these people have nothing to teach anyone other than that ill-informed and selfish people made a bad decision that in this case is affecting all of us.
17
Does anybody ever stop to think no matter who gets elected there will be substantial criticism being thrown around. I don't care if you're blue or red the business of politics is disgusting at best.
All Presidents have their issues, some worse than others and somehow our republic gets through the supposed horror show.
This show will end at some point and the next "idiot" will replace the current "idiot" and the criticisms shall follow like clock work. All Presidents do both good and bad. That's life.
What we do need is a Senate and Congress who are willing to listen to those folks across the aisle, realize those from the other side are actually capable of generating some good ideas on their own and then sit down together and work out an intelligent compromise.
You can never please everyone. Have respect for others and the ideas they have. Then work out a plan that more than likely will include compromise of some sort. These lopsided party line votes are the ultimate insult to anyone that is actually capable of realizing others have good ideas as well. To vote by party is perhaps the ultimate in stupidity when you actually think you are the only party on the planet with good ideas.
2
Trump's manic vulgarity, outrageousness, ignorance, incompetence, scorch the earth politics, and low class character have wearied the American people at a rate that has outpaced the growth of his supporters. That simple fact combined with his foolish unwillingness to make any effort to his appeal beyond his base lessens his chances of re-election. A previous comment declared "Who cares what his supporters think?". If he continues to hemorrhage support at the current rate (and we haven't heard from Robert Mueller yet), it won't matter what he does or his supporters think. They will retreat to the dark corners from whence they came and wait for their next chance to inflict their alienation and hateful resentment upon society. Trump is an obscenity, to be sure, but his election was an accident of politics and history unlikely to repeat itself any time soon. His followers, however, have always been among us and what they represent constitutes the greatest internal danger we face going forward. They are not going anywhere.
6
The pro-Trump letters, and the letters in response denouncing either the letter writers or The Times for publishing them, all fail to admit or address the one underlying reason that Donald Trump is president:he was voted in as payback by people outraged that America had the unmitigated gall to elect a black man to the highest office in the land. GOP supporters had 16 choices to lead their party -- and ultimately this nation -- and they consciously picked the most nationalist, most racist candidate. And they will hang on to and savor that revenge for as long as they can, even if they bring the entire nation crashing down around them.
11
Freedom of speech means that no speech is censored no matter what your subjective self thinks, and no matter how objectively odious. My atheist, socialist speech is odious to left behind fundamentalists and Ayn Rand fanatics. The marketplace of ideas is a bracing playground.
2
Nobody could say you don't give the Trumps a voice.
I am so sorry, I tried so hard to understand Trump voters
in the beginning, I can understand those who feel
left out and marginalized and they are right, the
Democratic party has left a lot of innocent
and hard working people high and dry and
most of the Democrats have sold their
souls to the same donors as the Republicans.
And Hillary just did not cut in in so many ways,
plus honestly she is corrupt herself, and
even with all that she was the better choice, but oh
the neglected Rust Belt while she partied
at elite fund raisers. Her hubris was stunning.
I get it. But to not be able to see through Trump
yet is staggering to me. He has no clue and
his stupidity is breath taking. He has confessed
outright to obstruction when he said he fired
Comey to stop the Russian investigation. And
I think the press should be even more biased
for the truth than they are. The NYT has been
pretty darn good about this as far as I am concerned.
I hold on to their reports with grateful hands and also
to the great insightful comments. They have
helped save me during this maelstrom. And The
Young Turks, who do not mince anything but tell
it as fairly as they can. And the late night talk show
monologues and emails from friends passing on
hopeful finds. If this craziness is what the Trump
voters felt before Trump then they have my sympathy,
but strait up Trump Dudes, he will destroy you.
4
Of course a "newspaper of note" must include a wide sample of viewpoints, including those who support the President of the United States. That's a no-brainer.
1
the letters from Trump supporters brought nothing new, the same exact Rhetoric and imaginary wins we hear from Sarah Huckabee every day, full of lies and fantasies.
The only benefit of the current mess is that it exposed the big minority in this country that Trump represents, xenophobic, racist, whiners. My concern is that three or seven more years of this misery will tear this country apart.
Trump will definitely not make America great again, it is great now, the worst he can do is isolating America and making it the laughing stock of the world.
4
I’m with Robyn Lipman, NY:
“Please don’t ever do that again”
2
None of this will matter as soon as Mueller presents his report about Trump and, among many other things, money laundering with the Russians. He will be seen as a traitor by his supporters and this nightmare will be over.
1
Oh, great. More Trump-splaining.
You'd have to live in a pretty airtight silo to avoid hearing why voters and many news outlets remain pleased with the Trump presidency.
Of course, fact-checking their claims and adding a dose of critical thinking and historic analysis helps make sense of it.
The content of a few burnished, selected letters to the editor really doesn't do much. In fact, the raw material in the Comments section sheds much more light on the whys of Trump voters and it takes up less space on the valuable real estate of the Opinion page.
Please don't do this again.
4
It's a great idea. Publish them! Only, don't edit, spell check or otherwise correct them. Publish them exactly as they're written. Will go a long way toward explaining what happened.
1
I often wonder what it is about America that makes it the "shinning light on the hill". We've only been around a couple of centuries, yet we are "the" place to live and love. I believe it is our melting pot immigration policy.
It's not that immigrants need to give up their culture but perhaps add to ours. That to me is how you continue to grow and shine.
1
Thanks, NY Times, you ruined my day yesterday.
I require myself to read and listen to people with whom I disagree. This is one vital test of staying away from double talk partisanship and a way to test what one believes against other ideas and perspectives. Your letters from Trump lovers were not helpful in any regard.
Strip away the horrid ideas that Trump embraces and I would still be aghast at the idea of him as president. He could be a moderate on policy with a mixture of right and left viewpoints and he would still be a disaster. He takes no one's counsel and believes himself the grandest example of a human ever to have lived.
He hates the free press/media. He does not understand nor accept basic human rights, the rights outlined and ensured by our Constitution and he does not understand government, the presidency and how all of it is supposed to work for the benefit of all. He would be dismissed as a ignorant buffoon except for the fact that he is the grandest example of a self promoter in American history.
Look, I respect many people who disagree with me. Some of them are friends and dear relatives. Your letter writers attributed everything good in the world to Trump, but they didn't say why they believe this.
Round up some smart people with strong backing for their ideas to write favorably about Trump. There must be some somewhere who are not merely partisan slugs and sycophants. Keep searching. Don't fall prey to trying to be balanced in an ignorant way.
4
The only point to take away from the Trump supporters' letters is just how scared they are of change (demographically, economically. socially). Things will change no matter what they do (build a wall, deport people, cling to dying industries). The whites are going to become a minority, the next industrial revolution (AI, robotics) will take place. And, the rich will inhabit gated communities, while the trash will be confined to ghettoes. Trump can't stop any of this and doesn't care as long as he and his spawn profit and get out before the collapse.
1
I wonder how Trump supporters reconcile their opinion of him with what the rest of the world is saying. When China and Russia are regarded more highly than the U.S. - where in God's name is he steering your nation?
3
Reading the letters from Trump supporters was depressing but not surprising. Their praise reveals that they believe his lies, especially his boasts. What can be done when people don't know, or don't want to know, the truth? Their ignorance of the facts and failure to appreciate the values that make our country unique make them a threat to the rest of us.
I find it hard to be sympathetic because Trump's rhetoric is blatantly racist, sexist, and xenophobic. He's not simply crude. He is immoral and his "policies," to the extent he is capable of remembering a few talking points given to him by others, have damaged our relationships with allies, encouraged and supported dictators, jeopardized our physical and financial well-being (with the exception of the very richest citizens), and harmed our natural resources,
1
I thought your forum was a good idea. I'm more than ever convinced that the right has lost its moral underpinnings. They've become a movement of narcissism and boorishness led by the most narcissistic, boorish man-child ever to be president. Every one of the OK-with-Trump letters made the same argument, the ends have justified the means, and they're very happy with the means as they've made more money.
3
I have yet to see a Trump supporter who has even the slightest interest in understanding the other side‘s point of view.
3
Trump is lacking in basic decency, morality, manners, and civil behavior. More than one of the Trump supporters indicated as much. How far have we fallen as a society that anyone can begin a conversation with "Well, my president is kind of a loudmouthed braggart and he uses rude language..." Just stop right there. You lose.
2
I loved the Time's decision to give a voice to Trump supporters, specially articulate ones. I, for one, found it illuminating. I despise Trump, but I'm tired of hearing the simplicism that all his supporters are just xenophobic.
2
There is a fundamental problem here that seems unrecognized, even by the NYT's most dependable commenters.
The unspoken assumption to which we are expected to stipulate, is that the New York Times has an editorial position on the left, or far left, of the political continuum. Thus it will provide balance to the national discourse to present the views of Trump supporters.
Nonsense. The Times is centrist at best, and Trump supporters are in an alternate universe. How about "balancing" by presenting the view of those of us who are actually on the left? Those of us who think America is an oligarchy. Those of us who wish for democratic socialism and want a radical change to our toxic form of capitalism. Those of us who think education reform is going to destroy public education and that the Times is complicit in the destruction. Those of us who think George W. Bush and Dick Cheney are war criminals. Those of us who think racism merits reparations. Those of us who want free, universal health care. Those of us who want to save the Earth from the excesses of consumerism.
Now that would provide balance!
5
Trump voters are "in for a penny, in for a pound".
It has been clear from the start that they would lemming off a cliff along side him so none of this is surprising.
4
Reading the letters of those who still support this awful man, I kept thinking of the "good Germans" pre-WWII who turned a blind eye to, or openly countenanced and participated in, the injustice, cruelties and authoritarianism all around them. Not a thought given to the growing millions living in dire fear of imminent arrest, deportation and separation from their families, or the millions of Puerto Rican Americans having to cope with months of utter devastation, or the generation of children growing up to value cruelty and model crudeness, or the millions of young girls and women thoughtlessly insulted and thoroughly devalued every hour of every day. Not a thought given to the unrestrained corruption and the worldwide security concerns it has engendered. Not a thought given to so many positive American values and priorities abandoned or deliberately undermined.
I am glad these people are only a minority among us, but it still rankles that even 20-30% of Americans can think this way.
5
I am very appreciative of the NYT for publishing these letters.
I am very aware these days of the critical importance of knowing one’s enemy.
Knowing, not understanding or sympathizing.
See y’all at the ballot box later this year.
6
As a Dem, I think listening to the other was time well spent. I too think lowering the corporate tax was a good move, and if you are seeing a large tax cut, you must be a business person not working class, good for you. I too think the government can be at times too intrusive but without it, I'd bet we are still fighting for civil right, or the civil war. I hoped Trump, once elected would pivot to governing but no, he seems to be running a next installment of a reality show. I also hoped Trump's quirks is his Bad cop - Good cop routine but it seems unlikely he has the intelligence, beyond his desire to win in a business deal to pull something like it. It's been said business people can't run governments but I was willing to have Trump prove it wrong, 1 year after, all I see is an unserious guy having caught his own tail, winging it.
2
And please, enough is enough. The intransigent, entrenched, erroneous beliefs of even even educated people who held onto their "gut" feelings of fear of foreigners, irrational love of religion, and deep need for wealth is by now well known and thoroughly beaten to death. The only take awau here is that Democrats need to emphasize Jobs, responsible Military preparedness and Wealth that supporting responsible immigration of all immigrants, quality "free" public and ongoing education cam bring. Money is the true Republican "god". Fear of somebody else getting it is the force driving what they call Conservative. These are not rational people. Only the more moderate will be reachable with the right message. Best stop with the hindsight and get and be on message.
And as an addendum, that we have devolved into a two party system that ignores all others, this is what we get, massive divisiveness. The media is grossly culpable in this.
2
Congratulations to The New York Times for a much-needed public service: providing a forum for civilized discourse among people who disagree. The comments from most of the Trump supporters were polite and thoughtful. Although I disagree with most, if not all, of their beliefs, I am grateful to read opinions without a rancorous tone. I call upon Fox News, Breitbart, and all right-wing (and other) news and opinion organizations to follow the Grey Lady's lead. Let's bring make America civil again.
5
In the spirit of Voltaire. just what a free press should do, promote free debate.
It's also a relief because I sensed a tendency in the Times editorials to adopt a holier than thou attitude. to blame, for example the Congress for the shutdown derby when it was the Republican leadership of both houses who turned all to jelly when the President reneged on the Dreamers. Let the President's supporters speak for themselves.
Others will have seen the common factual weakness in these interesting comments. They credit President Trump for a mostly healthy real economy when it was President Obama's policies which drove recovery and undergirded Trump's first year in office. Trump may claim credit for a rising stock market but stocks are not the real economy, as the 2008 collapse and previous panics have demonstrated.
2
It's not as though the Times is endorsing these opinions. I can't understand why anyone would object to this. Or, rather sadly, being on Facebook and confronted every day with people who, like me, detest this man and his administration, refuse to engage the big question: why and how so many people could have voted for him. Until we figure that out — and figure out how to counter it — we'll never be able to help ensure that future candidates from both parties are never as profoundly unqualified in every way as this one was.
2
The Times failed its readers and it failed intelligent discussion of Trump and his policies.
Take the "Trump defeated ISIS" comment as one example. Yeah? Wasn't the American military engaged in various ways in this battle for years? Didn't the Obama administration make the decision to send arms to the Peshmega, the fierce fighters of the Kurds in Iraq? Oh, Trump did everything?
Next, the economy. The long recovery under Obama meant nothing to these letter writers. They see Trump as responsible for everything good. They obviously don't understand that economic trends don't turn on a dime, except in a time of economic collapse as happened under the president before Obama.
The Times should have just asked the Republican National Committee to write in. It would have been equally informative.
These letters reflect people deep in a defensive crouch and unwilling to consider any counter information. Because they tell themselves, and are told by Fox Noise and talk radio, that the negative information about Trump is purely partisan, they feel free to generate purely partisan responses.
We have a president with no respect for the rule of law, the role of the free media, the ordinary processes of govt., the need to appoint people to lead agencies and with a dark personal record in relation to women and who was a spectacular failure at the only public company he ever headed. None of this matters to your letter writers and they can't, or wouldn't, mount a reasoned defense. A waste!
3
Perfect:
"I hope that these thoughtful voices can be the seed for real dialogue in what has too often become a vicious shouting match in which both sides fling invectives at each other."
Perfectly wrong. One's voice is not thoughtful when proclaiming night is day, four equals five, when one can not see destructive behavior and actions that are clear as day, when one enables destructive behavior. Real dialogue can only happen when both parties are thoughtful. But one party is profoundly thoughtless, and worse. "Both sides fling..." oh dear god, this precious stuff is in some ways worse than what the Trump/Republican supporters come up with, normalizing them by sounding high-minded. It implies not getting it. And not getting it puts democracy in peril.
4
The Trump voter letters just show how much they, and Trump, live inside the FOX News bubble of lies and misinformation.
Kind of ironic when you consider today's articles about Trump and Kelly and how Trump hates to be managed.
FOX News manages Trump every single day. His tweets confirm it.
3
I learned more from the letters condemning the Times for allowing an "opposing" point of view than from the open discourse referred to. Examples, Robyn Lipman -- "Please don't ever do that again"........don't expose her to any other viewpoints. Lawrence Rosencrantz --- "we need you to focus on solving the threats to our democracy rather than focus ad nauseam on the supporters of the threats." I guess one day in 365 is too much for him to handle. Also, it is ironic that he is concerned about threats to our democracy, yet wants to eliminate alternative points of view.
Thank you, New York Times for being open-minded, even if it was only one day.
2
To see Trump as "authentic" is simply not to see.
3
Julie Tebo’s letter was the most on target in asking in asking that we always consider what is the greatest good for the greatest number. We have to be careful in separating style from substance. Does anyone like Trump’s style? Very few. Does he make us relook at policy assumptions and priorities? Yes, and we should always ask if there is an unexpected benefit inside the hot air. We need a GI veterans-type education bill for those in outmoded industries like coal mining. Can we do that while supporting current immigration and military policies? I don’t know. But we should ask.
This is not a matter of fair and balanced, or liberal vs.conservative. it is a question of turning the NYT into a propaganda sheet for Trump.
4
Robyn Lipman is saying what people paying attention to this administration are thinking. If the NYT didn't bend over backwards to publish fascist apologia, maybe there wouldn't be a rallying cry to that note every week or so. Too bad there's no public editor to address consistent disconnects between the paper and the ethical questions raised by the paper's audience.
1
"The Furor Over a Forum for Trump Fans" The title itself explains the lack of diverse opinions in the NYT. The typical NYT reader is liberal, far-leftist or of some other anti-American sentiment who cannot even listen to an opposing view. Fascism? Nazism? Will liberals and leftists start building concentration camps for Trump supporters? Good luck. We are half of the country finally speaking out. This is a backlash to liberal social policy as well as Obama's weak foreign policy.
1
I read through the comments the Times chose to publish, and they universally separate the character of the president from the results of his presidency, which they largely approve.
Whatever you think of Trump’s ridiculous tweets, the accusations of Russian collusion and the myriad other positions he has taken you disagree with, it can’t be denied that there are objectively positive thing that happened over the last year, including:
The economy is roaring, as reflected in the stock market, lowering of unemployment, and economic growth over 3%;
The collapse of ISIS in Syria and Iraq;
Unanimous sanctions against North Korea, and the first signs of reconciliation between North and South Korea; and,
The long overdue recognition of Jerusalem as Israel’s capital.
I didn’t vote for Trump and I probably won’t vote for him in the future, but it’s sometimes refreshing to hear the President disregard politics, damn the bullets, and say whatever is on his mind (although I wish he would eliminate the lies, exaggerations and insults).
2
I read the letters from the Trump supporters with interest. The contents were strikingly similar as were the faces of those pictured and their names. Nobody seems to care much about health care, public education, the climate or the environment.
What struck me was the fact that everyone pictured was white. What I would like to know is how many of the letters you received were from women,visible minorities and members of other minorities? Please provide more background information about the demographics of those who submitted letters.
5
It never hurts to hear different points of view, and I have often found that it is a sign of emotional intelligence to be able to listen to others you disagree with calmly.
7
I'm struck by the lack of empirical evidence and reliance on Fox News and White House talking points among the Trump supporters. Thank the Russians for defeating ISIS. Thank Obama for the solid economic performance. Gorsuch has played a minor role so far. Thank the Republican Congress for the tax cuts which any Republican president would have signed.
But some questions. How have the recently passed tax cuts lowered African American unemployment to historic lows in just weeks?
How can bringing the United States to the brink of war with North Korea be a positive?
Why is surrendering U.S. leadership on the world stage a good thing? Did you forget that the Russians worked to get Trump elected?
And you would vote for Trump again? Why?
3
Because he is much better than the Democrats and a refreshing return to common sense.
1
I was surprised that even "educated" Trump supporters lack any sense of consequence for his actions, and that banner headlines without analysis satisfy them.
I noted his supporters are not concerned about Trump's racist, xenophobic and sexist stances. They especially applaud his racism by appreciating his "getting rid of immigrants".
For Democrats running in red states, take note. De-emphasize his character--they don't care.
Of note also was that Trump supporters give him credit where none is due. They say he wiped out ISIS in Syria, not knowing that Iraqis and Kurds did the fighting, following Obama's plan. And, ISIS still exists.
They say the U.S. economy is booming due to Trump. It is booming, if you look at the DOW. It is booming for a tiny sector of Americans, including Trump and Congress.
Wealthy multi-nationals and individuals are doing well by banking off-shore and reinvestiing in themselves, or, by buidling factories in poor countries with no worker protections. Shareholders benefit..
But we lack jobs. The US has a lower labor force participation rate than all European Union countries, Russia, and China. We do beat Turkey and Brazil.
Those who thought provoking North Korea toward a nuclear war was a good idea didn't mention worldwide death.
With no in-depth analysis and faith in headlines alone, Trump supporters think he's done well.
Their lack of reference to long term consequences of his ideas shows his base is not critical thinkers.
9
Ask the Trump supporters to cite their sources, challenge outright falsehoods and provide their reasoning. Just relaying information from people who think Obama is not a citizen or who at root do not believe in equality for all is not enough.
4
I agree with Robyn Lipman. It was really hard to read those opinions.
2
The persistent urge the NYT exhibits to engage in one type of anthropological survey or another; all to elicit the opinion of lesser-spotted, more aggrieved white voter is, I'd venture, an itch they should resist scratching from here on in.
I have little issue with examining and understanding why someone voted for such an unusual candidate as Trump. Surely though, after near weekly excursions into the next rural diner to hear the same thoughts uttered again and once more, surely we know by now why Trump voters say they voted for Trump. We have also gleaned why they actually did so - which may not be the same thing.
The expeditions can come to a close and the Paper of Record return to faithfully reporting whether this unusual President's policies and behavior merit dismissal, disdain or dersision.
2
Not one of those Trump supporters mentioned his horrible racism. That fact, along with their refusal to see how Trump is hurting people other than themselves, stood out.
9
Reading the letters from Trump supporters confirmed what I believe to be true: they live in a fact free, upside down world, devoid of judgement, curiosity, and empathy for anyone or anything outside their own selfish little orb of existence. Any fact, any truth, any human life, that contradicts their alternative reality, they deny, ignore, dismiss or denigrate. So yes, these letters serve a valuable purpose. They make me more determined than ever to, this November, get out the vote for Democrats at all levels of government. It's the only way to stop the destruction of our Constitution, our democracy, and the lives of millions of people, including many Trump supporters, by Trump and all his GOP enablers and co-conspirators.
4
The letters from trump supporters did not raise my opinion of their reasoning. I am not a lawyer. You would be well advised not to take my legal advise. I am not a doctor. My medical opinion would be not be useful. Trump is not a President, Statesman or diplomat. His contribution to our Nation and Government is worse than ineffectual, it borders on depraved indifference.
And to all appearances, that indifference is okay with the trump supporter. That makes no sense to me
3
It is easy to be impressed by the stock market rising, or unemployment being low. The real damage from Trump comes in other areas---the environment, the loss of momentum in scientific research, the damage to international relations that are lead by a buffoon.
In addition, he is seen as erratic and unreliable.
But the greatest damage is to civility and decency. We look to leaders to be decent and respectful. Trump is none of these. If you want respect, then show respect. His constant insults of decent people is unforgivable. As I think of the last 6 or7 presidents I could invite any of them to dinner and know they would be polite and good conversationalists. Trump not a chance.
3
.
Crediting Trump with a growing economy -- given that the government's fiscal year begins October 1, and we're barely two months onto his "ticket" -- is absurd.
The new tax laws don't even take effect for another year, and even the Congress doesn't fully understand what's in them, let alone taxpayers (letter-writers) who are extolling the alleged improvements before they've even filed.
The stock market is enormously over-inflated; most Americans don't even own stock anyway.
And not a single mention of the disgraceful and destructive racial and religious bigotry this man spews.
These letters were essentially nothing but 'ver batim' recitations from Trump's own website and other propaganda sources: unoriginal, with just about every claim demonstrably untrue.
How Trump can cast a spell on one segment of the public like this is baffling and unnerving.
.
4
I was very happy to read these letters, primarily because they support my belief that what counts in political choice is the underlying narrative, and that people whose narratives are incompatible will never understand each other. The Trump supporters who wrote these letters are not ignorant yahoos. They express themselves well. They have facts on their side: the economy IS doing well; ISIS IS defeated. They weave these facts into a narrative that justifies their support. For the opposition, these facts don’t natter because they have a conflicting narrative, in which racism or sexism are more important than the flourishing stock exchange. Both narrative are equally valid depending on your prior assumptions. I personally agree with the second one but liberals will make no headway with Trump supporters until they learn to challenge their narrative, not just their facts.
I suppose it's good to know that a majority of Trump supporters appear to believe that he "got rid of ISIS." Question is, how did they get that idea?
3
Like others, I am amazed at the lack of empirical evidence from Trump supporters about his actual influence and their reliance on anecdotal evidence and even biased Fox News and White House talking points. So, thanks to the New York Times for allowing Trump supporters to confirm my suspicions.
Most experts say there has been little change in our strategy in the Middle East for combating ISIS, so credit Obama and especially the Russian intervention in Syria. The recent tax reform bill that any Republican president would have signed could not have lowered African American unemployment to historic lows in just a few weeks. And overall unemployment has been declining for years, so thank Obama again. The same goes for Illegal immigration while deportations had been rising.
Meanwhile, Trump has brought the United States to the brink of war with North Korea with his saber rattling rhetoric. He enflamed the Middle East by moving the U.S. embassy in Israel to Jerusalem, for no apparent purpose. In short, led by a demagogic and pathological liar, the President of the United States is surrendering our moral and ethical leadership on the international stage. These ideals matter to the majority of Americans.
2
I was truly sickened after reading the portfolio driven responses of the participants. I don't think I was enlightened by their reasons for voting for Trump, dare I use the word President before his name. Money is the root of all evil and these roots will strangle the tree of democracy. I am ashamed of what our country has become, a country that uses child health care as a bargaining chip. a country that turns a blind eye on children brought here by their parents and wants to round them up and send them "home". A home they have no connection to. We must all pray for our country...she certainly needs it.
2
I consider Trump's temperament to be a clear and present danger to the nation. The letter writers, at least those who mention it, seem to feel it is nothing more than a blemish, a minor pimple. Astonishing and terrifying the difference in judgement on the man's essential character and its implications for the safety and security of our country.
3
Contrary to popular opinion, and undoubtedly to the distress of many readers of and respondents to the New York Times, this is NOT a binary situation. People who did not support Clinton or the policies of President Obama are not automatically Trump supporters. Far too many correspondents here arrange a completely synthetic and phony syllogism:
Major premise: You do not support Progressive policies
Minor premise: Those who do not support Progressive policies support Trump
Conclusion: You are a Trump supporter
This is false logic because it supposes a binary situation, which is absolutely incorrect for most Americans. But this is the argument that Clinton/Sanders/Obama supporters want to have, for the clarity of the (false) logic explained above. But most Americans are eclectic in their politics.
As for non-Progressives (ie; everyone who disagrees with you) being immune to logic and a big old bunch of science deniers, I point you to the recent science-denial revival meeting hosted here by the New York Times upon release of Trump's physical and cognitive function exam results, as delivered and explained to a disbelieving press corps. When Presented with the science by a reputable physician, 90+% of New York Times commenters went into full-scale denial mode.
This whole dialogue needs to be taking place on a far higher plane than the Populist bandwagon level it currently is being played out on.
I cannot stand Donald Trump and almost can't believe how the folks who voted for him can rationalize their decision. However, by chastising the NY Times for printing their letters, we become no better than the Trump voter who only listens to Fox News and Breitbart. To grow and come together, we need to hear from the other side. If we want to return to civil discourse, we must be willing to listen.
1
Count me among those who were appalled by your decision to showcase Trump supporters on your editorial page yesterday. Here's the problem: their views are well known and understood at this point. How many voting preference autopsies have we been subjected to over the past year? I’ve lost count. Here’s what we already know and fully understand: they're disillusioned, marginalized, bored, aggrieved, misogynist, bigoted, and conservative. Here’s what we also know: most right-minded people no longer care. These folks have been among us always; they just didn't have a charismatic leader like this one to urge them out of their particular closets. Now they’re large and in charge. Good for them.
What is more interesting and arguably more important--and here is what you might now consider publishing--is why the vast majority of the American people are so distraught about this Administration. Many people, myself included, don't care one iota about Trump voters anymore; they are a lost cause. What we do care about is the damage being done to the nation by Trump and his cronies. So there’s your next question: what do Americans fear most from this Administration? Let us come together and articulate THAT because, by doing so, we will have articulated that which we love and respect most about who we are and what we stand for. And that, in the end, might help us come to terms with our grief over a vision that may well be permanently lost.
1
Ms. Gervais is the only person whose letter inspires dialogue with others who think differently. The other letters posted here by the Times only serve to continue and support the "us" vs "them" mentality that continues to be so harmful to our country. Why did the Times decide to publish letters that only serve to demonize others who think differently than most Times readers? The Trump supporters interviewed were very careful in laying out why they supported Trump - primarily having more to do with the policies they agreed with, rather than the man. These responses were less gracious.
I thought it was a shame that the pro-Trump letters were cushioned from direct critique by the Times declining to enable comments. It would have been useful to assess exactly how much of the arguments simply regurgitated well-worn Fox News talking points and @realDonaldTrump Twitter sloganeering, and how hollow and in many cases imaginary their litany of winning actually is.
As others have pointed out, the Letters from Trumplandia feature had overtones of an Op-Ed stunt and is no substitute for finding more rigorous and imaginative ways to incorporate and engage with pro-Trump arguments in a way that doesn't smack of condescending anthropological vision quests to Trump Country.
1
“Seek first to understand, then to be understood”
Those letters were very hard to read, but I forced myself to do so. We all love this country and need to be able to hear each other.
Thank you nyt for making an effort in this direction. I am a longtime reader and love you deeply, but you have drifted far far far from any kind of objective reporting.
The more each camp digs in and the more we demonize each other, the further we drift from meaningful solutions to our challenges as a nation.
Sincerely
Laura Kuhn, San Francisco
4
I appreciate the fact that the Times is providing space for those that voted for Donald Trump to express their reasons for doing so. I would offer a suggestion that could take it a step further. Why not organize a town hall with some of those who wrote in to support Trump and those who clearly did not. Make sure it stays civil and you can live stream it on the platform.
It's one thing to post letters and have people take pot shots at each other online and it's another to see your opposite number face to face to see what they see.
I would definitely tune in for that.
1
While I certainly disagree with any support and defense of Donald Trump, I found myself more disgusted by the letters from the Trump voters who've come to regret their decision. For one thing, no matter how far I stretch my capacity for reason, I cannot understand how anyone can say that Hillary Clinton was unqualified to be president, let alone a worse choice than Donald Trump. As for the regret, you - we all - saw clearly what and who Donald Trump is during both the primary and the general campaigns, along with his decades in public life. How could anyone have convinced themselves that he would change upon becoming president? I find that unforgivable. We are stuck with him because of those people.
1
Without exception, Trump supporters give him credit for a dubious economy (it’s still Obama’s economy), a booming stock market (has little to do with the real economy) and never mention his overt racism, his divisive politics and attitudes, his transparent misogyny and his dangerous escapades with North Korea. They completely ignore the corruption of his administration and his self enrichment at our expense going on with his businesses. They ignore the monumentally destructive invasion of our democracy on the part of Putin’s Russia. They only mention a few vague platitudes about how “authentic” he is without recognizing the damage he has done to real people, real lives and to the stability of the greater world. What on earth is wrong with these people?
3
Thank you for publishing the letters of Trump supporters. It's interesting to see their thinking.
Four things struck me most: (1) many writers gave Trump credit for things he plainly isn’t responsible for--such as the good economy, which he inherited, and defeating ISIS, which he had virtually no hand in; (2) some of the writers have a schoolyard view of the efficacy of bullying; (3) they openly accept his crudeness and lack of character, and implicitly (by not mentioning them) accept his racism, lying, cheating, and assaults on women, which shows an unconcern for morality and justice; and (4) they see Trump’s constant stream of insults and demonstrations of ignorance as “authentic,” rather than as eroding the foundations of our civic life and setting a terrible example for our children.
3
I appreciated the opportunity to listen, learn, and to try to understand Mr. Trump's popularity with so many citizens. What surprised me, wait, concerned me greatly was the woman who stated that Mr. Trump talks like "me," like Americans. No, he does not, and had I ever used the language that Mr. Trump has used, or lied consistently, or made an art of blaming others, oh my parents would have used lye soap until my tongue gave out and my tonsils and vocal cords disintegrated. No, I do not think that most Americans are Trump clones, not by a long shot. I grew up with a completely different set of values and social behavior.
4
Publishing these letters should be a coda of a very bad twelve months.
Sorry, but 2017 was the year of giving people who claimed they were being ignored their say. (Remember the 'forgotten man' bit written by Bannon in Trump's inaugural address?)
I think we're done. These letters just confirm my worst fears. People are overtly complicit with what they admit is conduct unbecoming of a President. And they justify it by regurgitating conspiracy theories that make them feel better.
1
I think it's great that the NYT chose to publish these letters from Trump voters. It gives me a better understanding of what they want from a President. Clearly, they want someone who is:
-Loud and unapologetic about his or her beliefs.
-Distrustful of authority and critical of the media.
-Keen on putting America first.
Take note, Democrats. These ideas are not incompatible with liberal values. You can have a candidate who does all of these things, and still supports universal healthcare, cheap education, and social justice.
Donald Trump is morally bankrupt and sets a terrible example for the young people of our society. He and others like him must never be admired or respected for any reason, including policies that the minority find so pleasing.
2
So what have I learned by reading the letters from Trump supporters? That they are willing to trash our system of government, along with the U.S. constitution and support an authoritarian dictator if it means that certain right wing political goals can be achieved. A classic "ends justify the means" argument. I don't need to "understand" these people. As far as I am concerned they have forfeited the right to call themselves Americans.
1
I was struck by how similar the arguments by Trump supporters sounded.It's almost as if they developed those arguments from the same source.
1. Trump gets rid of pesky regulations.
2. Trump appoints conservative judges. (Some of whom have questionable credentials.)
3. Trump gets us out of international agreements that are "bad" for us.
4. Trump beat ISIS.
5. Trump has given us a tax cut, aka allowed us to "keep more of our money."
6. Trump is an undiplomatic voice on the national and international scenes, i.e. not politically correct.
Each of these "accomplishments" will have consequences. It remains to be seen if the Trump supporters ever come to repudiate their current judgments.
1
I think we should give Trump credit for energizing political interest and involvement. His threatening nature is waking people up and they are getting involved, more and more, each day. I believe that as a nation we have been asleep, but every Trump Tweet is waking us up.
But just was Trump wakes us up, he is turning the country into a monarchy.
=========================================================
The United States of America, is becoming a United States of Trump.
We can't let this happen!
1
Just shows the difference between liberals and conservatives. Conservatives understand that the world is not black and white and that decent people can have different views. Liberals believe that only their view is valid and that anyone who holds an opposing view is deplorable.
1
I’ve been reading The NY Times since I was 8. I’ve never been as angry with the trend in its reporting than the past two years, the coverage of the 2016 campaign and in the first year of the Trump administration. You ran story after story about Hillary’s emails and right before the election chose to produce a story that was a bald-faced lie about the FBI not investigating the Trump campaign. How many times, including today, have you run stories about Trump supporters and their feelings? Too many to the point of nausea. I’ve come to believe strongly that Trump supporters are generally not well-informed and in many cases, as racist as Trump himself. They generally only watch Fox. They bought all the negative stories about Hillary coming from Trump, his enablers and Russia.
We need to stop this indulgent fascination with Trump supporters. Democrats need to work at turning out their voters, no matter who they are. We will never convince many of Trump supporters that they’re not toadies, enablers and that Trump is destroying our country. Perhaps they will eventually see that but nothing we say can convince them given they can’t distinguish between facts and lies. Can we have more stories about the resistance or Democrats? And no more about white supremacists and other Trump supporters.
3
Having been a small-town newspaper editor through many an election cycle, I detected a strong whiff of orchestration in the pro-Trump letters. The language, the talking points, even the tone was similar from one letter to the next. Either writers received some coaching or your own editors went a little too far in applying the Times style book to their manuscripts.
1
"Please don't ever do that again." From a letter about the Trump justifiers published in the Times.My sentiments exactly. And stop adding fuel to the fire
by paying so much attention to Trump's absurd and evil comments. You got him elected with all this attention. Now stop.
Let's get (back to?) economic problems, which you dropped when you chose Clinton as your candidate. Sanders, with his clear and simple New Deal program, was the only viable (Democratic) candidate. He is still the most popular politician in America. How about devoting space to those of us who support him.
Of course, you won't publish this. I have criticized the Times too much.
I wonder if the fact that the enemy NYTimes gave them a forum will cause any Trump voters to consider for one instant that maybe the media isn't all fake and biased as their hero Trump constantly claims.
The real drag is that, for these voters, Trump's economic diagnosis was correct. But he was like a doctor who correctly diagnoses lung cancer and then prescribes cigarettes.
1
I wonder if the right-wing media will reciprocate and devote space or air time for Trump's critics.
1
Oh my. The majority of Trump supporters fully believe he has delivered a healthy economy and defeated ISIS all by himself. Clearly they were not paying attention during the Obama years...or they were paying attention, but only to Fox news, which spent most of its time telling lies.
The very idea that Trump gets some magnificent credit for signing a tax bill delivered by a Republican controlled Congress is laughable. Of course he signed it—-he stands to make millions from it. We little people will find out in about 13 months how it affects us.
1
I'm generally a liberal but not always, but Trump has shown me the depth and breadth of an American population I did not know exists. The small pockets of hate, racism, and biased politics is not new to me, but how it pervades inner dissatisfaction amongst reasonable working and educated people was new to me. These letters continued to inform me about their support for Trump but what saddens me is that many supporters chose to ignore his lack of basic decency, fairness nor ability and attempt to inspire us in resorting to childish bullying pranks on twitter.
I want to tell these die-hard supporters that a President is more than a vehicle to enforce narrowly defined policies especially when he lost a popular vote. A president needs to be a leader of our country who upholds our country's democratic values which are admired around the world. It is very disappointing that some supporters are willing to overlook the consequences of Trump's belligerence even when they see this side of him.
We are neighbors who need to do more to help each other rather than deepen non-negotiable hard boundaries regardless of the cost.
23
One possible constructive good to come from the letters forum would be to
organize an "across the chasm" discussion (with an easier to use
interface, allowing much easier searching and replying) that would enable a serious and engaged dialogue to be conducted
by those on either side of the society's deep divide of what has happened this year.
A second possibility would be for the "responsible conservative" op-ed
writers to engage with the letters writers in much greater depth
about their responses over the year etc. Make that the substance of a
more sustained in depth piece.
2
I find it troubling and disappointing that letters to the Editor that were and remain "pro Trump voters" were given a prominent placement on the Editorial page, but the letters of people who voted for Trump and regretted it are buried in the Letters section. I read the Editorial, Opinion, and Op-Ed pieces daily. I don't usually go to the Letters section and would have missed the letters from people who regretted voting for Trump had I not been alerted to the letters from a friend.
The letters from people who voted for Trump and regret that decision should have been given the same treatment and the pro-Trump letters (i.e., prominent placement on the Editorial page).
2
When Trump and his administration begin to use their voices (so admirable to their supporters) to change, eliminate, or reduce Social Security, Medicaid, and Medicare benefits, then let the NYTimes ask for more letters from these supporters. Let's hear how they feel about that! I suspect you won't get too many takers.
1
I really think the difference between progressives and republicans has to do with how to satisfy their basic human needs. Progressives believe humans must evolve and find ways to peacefully interact with each other while republicans believe that humans, like most animals, must use force as a deterrent to move forward. I believe that force could eventually lead to our extinction. Maybe republicans think that by having that force we’ll never use it.
That seems odd.
I am perpetually mystified by the number of Trump's supporters who readily praise his accomplishments thus far while lamenting the pain and destruction of Obama's two terms. Exactly how Americans suffer under Obama? It seems to me that he helped steer the economy from a dire financial crisis into a stable recovery that has continued under the current administration. There is no evidence it wouldn't have done so had Obama been able to pursue a third term. We have yet to see the impact of certain features of the recent GOP tax bill on a thriving economy with full employment, but reasonable economists have expressed concerns. The only thing I can imagine giving offense during Obama's eight years was the color of his skin, and the fact his presidency may have paved the way for an unpleasant national conversation about institutional racism in our justice and law enforcement system, and exposed the sense of bitter grievance and ugly nativism in a substantial portion of our white population.
1
The complaints over something as benign as comments from Trump supporters illustrates the problem - a host of readers of the Times are no more open to reading other perspectives than many listeners to Sean Hannity are to hearing liberal perspectives.
11
How about some letters from voters who spent every day of 2017 waking up anxious, appalled, worried, and disgusted by this president who is ruining our democracy? I'm 64 years old and have never spent a year worrying about the ruination of this great country, but now I do. I'm most disgusted by the complicit Republicans in Congress who allow this to happen. I want my old life back and Trump out of it! Mueller is my only hope.
2
I want to thank the New York Times for allowing for this much needed debate. This kind of public discourse is part of the foundation of this great democratic experiment we call America (which has always been great by the way). Any person who believes the Founders of this Union which we call home all got along and agreed on everything is greatly mistaken. They argued just as we do but they did it with grace and with respect for those who disagreed with them. They based their arguments with one another in reason and found compromise a welcomed alternative to a stalemate. Indeed, if our Founders had engaged in the identity politics we see today there would be no America. In that time it was our ability to find common ground despite our differences that united the THIRTEEN very different colonies to form this nation.
There is no outside force destroying America...we are doing it ourselves and no Wall can help us unless it forces us to talk with one another as we did in the beginning. Hope is not just a bumper sticker for the last campaign it is written into our very Constitution - “to form a more perfect union”. Everyday we stop debating and stop treating each other with civility we get further away from the promise our Founders laid out for us. When we finally find our way back to the ideals which unite us rather than those impulses which divide us we will be a stronger nation and we will honor the “Hope” that our inspired our Founders to seek a “more perfect union”.
8
Even though I have spent some time bashing Trump and those that support him and his administration, I too have been interested in learning all I can about this time. That is why I chose to read the letters in the forum.
I was disappointed to not learn anything new. Instead what I read was vague and unsupported by any real evidence. Not one person spoke to the reality of the shaded complexities in our world. Not one spoke to the troubles that corporations have have caused our environment. Not one spoke of the desire to live in a world of compromise. Not one spoke of a future based on trying to do better than we did 50 years ago.
5
What are we afraid of? Actually finding common ground or agreeing with someone we oppose? How could you not be for a newspaper having opposing views? This is why I originally became a fan of the Times. It reports on news, and actually, practices journalistic integrity.
I am not a Trump fan, but I understand and recognize the need for open and transparent dialogue. If you want to defeat Trump and the ugliness he represents, it is necessary to understand why fellow citizens, dare I say, neighbors in our communities, support him. Why friends or family could have actually voted for him. The best way to understand a position is knowing both sides of an argument. If you can't argue for something you disagree with, then you don't understand what you claim to believe. Was it hard to read these letters? Yes, it tells me that we have a lot more work to do as a country. It tells me that we as a people are divided and need to find common ground upon which to build society off of.
Both sides are acting like spoiled brats. In preschool I learned how to share. That is a lesson America needs to learn again, one citizen at a time. So, thank you NYT for doing something hard. This is how we correct the errors that lead to the election of Donald, through knowing why.
12
I think you provided a much needed public service. There are two sides in every debate. And the Trump supporters deserved to be heard. By and large the points made in their letters were clear and compelling. Although I couldn't help feel that in a couple of instances Trump was given credit that Obama deserved--especially for a growing economy and defeating ISIS.
8
I still have nightmares about that 'meter' that appeared every day in the Times as the election approached, the one that said that Hillary had a 90% probability of winning, then 95%, then well into the 99% range. The Times had managed to miss what was actually happening in the country. Letters from real Trump people are a good start in helping us understand why this happened and how we can fix it.
9
"...and how we can fix it." That sounds nice, but HOW do you propose we fix it? These people give credit to Trump for an economic stage set by Obama; one even thinks "testosterone" is what is needed in the White House. They all seem to agree that destroying our government is the best "fix" for what I don't think was that big of a problem to begin with.
@Shen-
That meter and the state-by-state road that coiled like a snake became a kiss of death, coupled with her atrociousness as a retail politician. Democrats in crucial states took the election’s outcome for granted, assumed victory, and stayed home, didn’t vote.
The election was her’s to lose and she lost it, in part because she was badly served by her strategy and, interpersonally, she was as wretched as Martha Coakley. But complacency finished what her ineptitude started.
1
What, if any, way will this change the outlook of people? I see no compromises or understanding, just anger and hate. The paper is at least trying to appeal to an audience that might not have paid attention, but most of the readers are headstrong about their views. If the President was elected by the majority, without the Electoral College, absolutely no one would ever visit a place like the State of CT where I am from. We have to live with our election and the process that has made this tortured conundrum.
3
Does anyone in Connecticut need a personal visit from a candidate in order to determine his/her fitness for office? Do you own a television? In New York, where Donald Trump is from, we knew all too well that he was not up to the job. We didn’t need to attend one of his rallies (which he never held here) in order to figure that out.
6
Mr. Trump ran on a platform of (1) immigration/race, (2) economic populism and (3) foreign non-interventionism. While he has pursued immigration/race with gutso, he has largely ditched the other two planks of his candidacy.
Mr. Trump's supporters, featured in the NYT editorial,
(1) dodge the question of immigration and race almost entirely, thus dodging the only visible "achievement" of this President
(2) never bring up economic populism - infrastructure, jobs, etc.
(3) are all for a muscular foreign policy.
In fact, they celebrate Mr. Trump's achievements in classical traditional Republican terms - free market, hawkishness, etc. As if Mr. Trump the candidate had never existed.
It seems that the only thing they supported in Mr. Trump's agenda all along is the issue of immigration and race, which for some reason they are too reticent to discuss openly...
10
Applaud the Times for this exercise in cross-border communication. Full disclosure: I despise Trump and virtually everything his administration stands for. Despite that, however, I value these insights into the people around me every day who don't agree with me. It helps me to understand them better, and, while I agree with very little that they said, I can see that many of them actually have a rational basis for their stances, at least in their own minds.
4
It was an interesting idea. But why run an unadulterated spate of pro-Trump letters with no opposing opinons? Seems to undercut the principle of a debate.
8
I'll keep saying it until I get an answer: I want to know what non-voters think.
I want to know what the non-voters think of Trump, and whether they still think that voting doesn't matter.
19
I'm not sure that we, who are pretty much appalled by both Trump's policies and his demeanor, will actually gain much understanding of his supporters from the letters you've published. If one is indeed interested in the formation of supporters' opinions of the Trump presidency, a few hours watching Fox News is a much more revealing approach.
7
I read each of the pro-Trump letters and gave their authors' words careful consideration. And now I have just one word for each of them: complicit.
19
Since the election I have read numerous article about how we non Trump voters should make an effort to understand Trump voters but I have yet to read one article about the reverse, Do any of these Trump supporters make any kind of effort to understand those of us who did not vote for him?
And those who say they voted AGAINST Hillary Clinton, where are the followup questions asking WHY they thought she was worse than Trump?
Seems THEY get a forum but WE don't.
13
Exactly. The Republicans won, the Republican voters must be heard! And when Democrats win, the Republican voters must be heard!
1
If I assume that most or all these writers are from the middle classes, i.e. earning way less than the cloistered top 1%, why are they still backing President Trump?
If everyone is supposed to look out for their own interests, these people are not doing it. They seem perfectly happy, in fact, giddy at the prospect of the Trump family raking in more money thanks to Government policies. A President who refuses to divest, going against accepted behavior and making money. Handing out billions to his fellow plutocrats, moving what little wealth the middle classes and the working poor had upwards.
An education secretary coring out public education that made this country great while benefiting personally from her own policies. The list from each Government department is endless and there's more coming. When all this is accounted for the Trump voter is poorer, less education, a lot sicker, maybe with no equity on their homes, breathing in smog, drinking tainted water and no chance of retiring and with virtually no health care. Whatever savings they had will now be managed by your friendly Wall Street retirement fund managers. May the greater powers help us.
I am seriously depressed for my fellow citizens, how do we even start a conversation? we need an intervention first.
11
Thank you for printing those letters. They help me understand the other side. What I do understand is that these people see the world in a totally different way than I do. Many seem like they get their info solely from Fox, which I do view from time to time, in short bursts.
One thing that I have learned from these letters is that Trump bragging daily about himself, supported by right wing media, has its effects. Like "Obama born in Kenya", many people, about 40%, seem to believe things about Trump that are demonstrably false, but are constantly repeated by right wing media as fact. As Orwell observed, it works well on some.
10
It's important to understand how they're thinking because they're going to enter the voting booth again. Sigh...
4
Let’s talk to all the people who didn’t vote and see if they regret that decision.
10
The main conclusion I can draw is that -- as is typical of most right wing politicians -- is their facile ability to take credit for the fruits of their predecessor's labors. The economy today is due to Obama, not Trump, and apparently 69% of all Americans realize this. Your letters writers are simply anti-Obama more than pro-Trump because they really are attributing to him things that Obama actually accomplished.
11
The litany of supposed "achievements" that the pro-Trumpians so uncritically credit their hero with are, word for word, almost identical '(pushed through tax reform, beat ISIS, pulled us of ouf bad trade agreements, got tough immigration: ad nauseam). This has to be more than coincidence; it speaks to a common source. I guess Trump is not the only one who gets his intelligence from Fox and Friends.
14
All of the letters from trump supporters made me cringe, but that's OK. I work near Youngstown, and I know that half the people I work with voted for trump, although no one ever talks about it. I know them, like them, respect them, but don't understand them. The letters help.
I do take some comfort from the fact that so many of the writers find it necessary to make excuses for trump, and so many give him credit for things he had little to do with, like the Dow. Both things make me hope that scales will fall from some eyes before it's too late.
5
Attorney General Jeff Sessions asked, in an interview with Fox News, “What good does it do to bring in somebody who’s illiterate in their own country, has no skills and is going to struggle in our country and not be successful?”
Because that is EXACTLY what America stands for-we are all equal in God's eyes and given the opportunity, all of God's creations on Earth can rise to achieve great things-to help lift up other people and bring light to those less fortunate than we are. If America stands for ANYTHING, it is the idea that we can all achieve greatness because that is the human potential. Success as a human is SO much more than mere financial achievement. The next Einstein, the next Picasso, the next Mozart, the next Austen, could easily be an illiterate person from a country with a low standard of living compared to a Trump Tower lifestyle-what matters is what is inside, not the wealth on the outside. As soon as we realize that and open our hearts and minds to the true human potential around the world the better off we will be. That is the America I feel part of-not a closed society that merits only financial achievement.
8
The U.S. correspondent for the nation daily here in Finland has conducted interviews with people in Grundy, a small town in Appalachia, both shortly before the election and now. This was a town in which 79% voted for Trump. Today, their opinions haven't changed; they're not too happy about the tweets, but they like the "outspokenness" and think he's doing an excellent job: some jobs in the mines have returned, and people are doing better. There are a couple of quotes I found revealing (note: I'm back-translating from Finnish, so the wording may not be exact):
"The Paris agreement was a farce from the very beginning. Why should we pay billions of dollars to protect the environment in foreign countries, if it means workers here in Buchanan go unemployed?" Another man said: "Reopening the mines is probably a short-term solution, but in people's everyday lives the short term can make a big difference".
At first I was shocked at what I saw as shortsighted ignorance. But then I thought: I'm one of those educated urban "elitists" who has benefitted enormously from international academic opportunities. I've never gone short, never had to worry about next month's rent or food for my kids. In other words: walk a mile in the other guy's shoes. I still think they're wrong, but I can see why they talk like this.
3
I welcome any opportunity to understand the thinking of people who voted for Trump. I am fascinated even more by the reasoning of those who think he has moved the country forward, has done a good job, has made us stronger as a democracy.
I happen to think Trump is one of the greatest, if not the greatest, con man to have ascended to the US Presidency. I also think he has disgraced us internationally; has demeaned the good offices that grace and courtesy bring to any institution; has displayed bigotry, if not pure hatred toward those who are not PLU, e.g. the poor, those who are not white, not Christian; and has set an example in his personal life and personal choices that no decent person would emulate or use as model for a child. This is just for starters.
And this is why I am fascinated. None of that seems to mean anything to those who wrote to support Trump. If I were to summarize these letters, they expressed a sentiment that as long as they got a tax cut, maybe a big one, and built a wall to keep out people looking for freedom and a better life, Trump's lousy character and daily doses of venom either don't mean anything, or, in some cases, it doesn't exist. Trying to understand the universe I live in and the universe they conceive is worth the effort to understand.
7
Many have commented on the booming economy, cited by Trump supporters, as either being of no importance or attributable to Obama. An honest appraisal of any economic indicator must give credit to Trump. Obama inherited a recession of epic proportions, but his stimulus package was not nearly as aggressive as it should have been, and produced lackluster results over eight years. The contrast under Trump is too dramatic to be denied. The stock market surged the day after he was elected and has only accelerated since. More importantly, unemployment is dramatically lower, the lowest it has been in years. Job creation is way up, and wages, stagnant under Obama, are finally moving. This is clearly a benefit to ordinary Americans broadly, not just Wall Steet (btw, retirees, not just hedge fund managers, benefit from a rising stock market). You can debate the long-term effects of deregulation and tax policy, but the effect on the current economy is real, and positive. The refusal of Trump haters to acknowledge even this one accomplishment illustrates how hopelessly blinded they are. This exercise by the Times really shows how divided the country has become. When people cancel their subscriptions over merely printing letters from supporters, who are called Trumpanzees, there is no hope.
1
Today in Forbes there was an article that indicated that the S & P index went up more in Obama's first year than it did under Trumo's/ Monthly job creation under the last six years of Obama was 200,000 instead of the 140,000 per month last year. The trade deficit was higher in 2017 than in any of the 8 years Obama was president. The facts do not support your conclusions at all. The economy is not doing much better under Trump than under Obama; he's just getting more credit for it because the first few years under Obama when we were still hemorrhaging jobs at the rate of 700,000-800,000 per month takes a whille to get over.
2
There was a common thread among many of the letters published yesterday. (And why excoriate the Times for voicing the opinions of 40% of the public?) The writers are willing to overlook Trump's many character flaws because they got the policy changes that they voted for -- like it or not. (Elections have consequences, no matter which side wins.) But is it worth compromising the basic nature of the country for the sake of a tax cut or a more conservative Supreme Court justice? What have we lost as the United States that any other Republican president with a normal set of standards would not have cost all of us?
4
Like many friends on Facebook, it's clear they are not as "open-minded" to others as they say.
Reading the comments here is disheartening. I voted for Hilary, do not support Trump, but calling folks who voted for him names is COMPLETELY against my belief, doing so would make me no different from him.
Michelle Obama's "When they go low, we go high," has sadly been replaced with, "When they go low, we go lower."
5
I have no strong objection to the publication of letters from Trump supporters because I don't see their publication itself as an endorsement of those views. It's also informative to see how the letters writers think, or fail to think. Mostly gut feeling with no real evidence to back it up, regurgitating themes from right-ring media. Maybe once they see their taxes and health costs rise over time might they come to suspect that they have been "Trumped" by Republicans. You can't "reason" with people who used no reason to arrive at their ideas. But pain can be a good teacher. Unfortunately, millions of children with suffer.
6
Earth, 21st century, is a scary place. How pleasant it must be to hear only what one would rather hear, to believe in simplistic answers for complex situations which humanity may not be able to solve, and to know exactly whom to blame. One hopes we will be able to recover from this retreat from reality.
2
Julie Tenbo wisely asks if the Trump supporters featured in your article are not considering his effect on the lives of others. Of course they are not--which is why I fear that he will be re-elected.
The voters asks, am I better off under this administration? Superficially and only regarding his _economic_ position, the middle-class (and most Trump supporters are) voter _thinks_ he is: stock market up, housing prices up, taxes down, unemployment 'way down. So (she reasons) why vote for a change?
Thus I can see the re-election of this out-for-themselves congress and administration. Alas.
3
Instead if that waste of time with T supporter letters, why not print pages of letters from the huge majority of Americans that support a clean DACA bill - 800,000 lives hang in the balance. I care about those people, not the ones who support tearing families apart.
5
I think this was a very productive thing for the Times to facilitate. I voted Hillary, but it's becoming harder with each passing day to ignore that a lot of what Trump has done has been a huge success. Some of the things he's been successful on were merely following through on the good work Obama started (e.g. economic recovery and ISIS), but there's not a doubt in my mind that almost immediately after Trump got elected, the business community reassessed his likely impact (you may recall that during the campaign markets seemed to prefer Hillary) and got real excited about the future. That perception has now become reality. Seems pretty clear for one thing that the tax bill Trump signed into law was a significant factor in Apple's decision to bring back $250 billion in foreign cash into the US, to, as a consequence, pay a $38 billion tax bill this year to the federal government, and to create 20,000 jobs. Whether these kinds of gains can continue I don't think anyone can say, but I don't think we ought to ignore the good news just because we didn't vote for the guy who brought it to us (or for that matter because, rightly or wrongly, we don't like him).
4
I'd like to see more letters from Trump supporters... And expert analysis by political analysts and others - particularly those who understand conservatives. There is a vast gulf between the two sides but understanding is the first step toward persuasion.
A few months ago the Washington Post ran a story about an African American blues musician whose 'hobby' was befriending white supremacists - a number of which eventually renounced their hateful beliefs https://www.washingtonpost.com/news/morning-mix/wp/2017/08/30/a-black-bl... If that musician, Daryl Davis, could achieve something like that, what's our excuse? Persuading even one Trump supporter to change his or her mind is more effective than shouting insults at ten thousand of them.
1
To me it's been like being in a car crash where you can see it all unfolding before you and you are unable to stop it. I'm not American nor do I live in America. Yet this travesty is affecting my country and the people in it. If I was young I could have the reassurance that I am likely to live in consistently better times. But us baby boomers are unlikely to have reassurance that we have moved solidly towards a time of
full and clear recovery from this Trumpian disaster. That's because it can be likened to turning a ship around. It takes time. What a living nightmare! ( Apologies for my pessimism!)
3
I held my nose and voted for Clinton. When Trump won I thought that if he could bring peace to the middle east, establish a reasonable dialogue with North Korea, get a better healthcare system in place I'd be happy.
See how that turned out?
Left with the question of what to do till it's time to vote again, I'm putting my effort into supporting the NPV - national public vote - initiative. The entire Constitution is outdated, but no one part so much as the Electoral College.
5
I support the Time's decision to highlight the thinking of citizens who are happy with Donald Trump. Back in 2001 I also thought it was important to understand the thinking of the terrorists who attacked us. Whether it be enemies or fellow citizens, it is intelligent to understand the thinking of others. Otherwise we revert to blind tribalism. Overall, I am still passionately wishing for an enormous rejection of this administration in the coming elections, but there are a (very) few points his supporters make for which I have some sympathy. How so many can give HIM credit for defeating ISIS on the ground, I don't understand. Have we forgotten that this battle began and made major progress under the last administration?
2
There's no sense running letters from no-information voters, or low-information voters who swallowed the Trump malarky and made no effort to find the truth before voting. If you can find voters who know what Trump really is and what he has said and done -- and still support him, they can confirm their massive lack of judgment by writing a letter.
5
I strongly reject Trump’s values, his leadership and his obvious contempt for traditional American institutions.His condemnation of a free and independent media and his attacks on the courts have no place in a democracy. BUT I applaud the Times for airing the views of Trump supporters.The reader can evaluate the validity of arguments defending Trump.The press must avoid censorship of unpopular voices.
3
If you folks had a multi-party system and its forms of political debate, the publication of opposing political opinions might not ruffle feathers as much as it seems to do here. Could support for Trump and Sanders back in 2016, albeit on their respective leading party tickets, have been a reflection of the electorate getting tired of choosing between Coke and Pepsi?
2
As a long time subscriber and reader, here's my problem with printing these letters: it begins with the assumption that as a reader of the NYT, I don't talk to Trump voters. I am sure my family is no different than many in USA. I talk with the Trump voters in my own family, and learned nothing new from these letters. We stand in very different places, toward what we see as a fair, equitable and just country for all, to say nothing of the looming climate change crisis. but, it doesn't mean we don't talk. I think media in general has made too much of the so called "news bubbles" and that far more on both sides talk to members of the "other" side.
5
I appreciate hearing others' viewpoints, but when virtually every viewpoint contains inaccurate statements and displays ignorance of history and context the article should provide corrections, history and context. Failure to do so diminishes public discourse and weakens democracy.
6
Many supporters of a political candidate seem to believe that a few simple actions will solve their problems, the nation's problems, perhaps even the world's problems. Many politicians promote the Simple Life notion, as Donald J. Trump has successfully done. That the world is increasingly complex, in part via consequences of population growth, means thinking more clearly about issues requires time, education and enlightenment many simply can't manage. Successful propaganda that stirs the gut reaction rather than thoughtful contemplation has for centuries created converts whose beliefs are seldom subject to change (unless catastrophic events alter one's set-mind obstinacy or deliberate ignorance).
Fact and truth, so vital to learning, to enlightenment and to possible wisdom
are easily abandoned or ignored. Many are astonished that Trumpian supporters aren't distressed by the bigotry, lies, exaggerations, whimsically-dangerous mental changes displayed in a President of the United States.
Holding fast to one's beliefs is paramount to one's staying in the Comfort Zone when complex challenges or even common-sense situations arise and attempt to provoke serious thought. When one is insecure, averse to self-analysis, bent on blaming others -- a leader who presents autocratic, simple answers can easily gain popularity. There's something eternally attractive about an Elmer Gantry, rainmaker, patent medicine purveyor ready to take advantage of the Folly of Belief.
5
One of the original Trump supporter comments included this phrase: "As the Sonny LoSpecchio character wisely concluded in the movie “A Bronx Tale,” it’s better to be feared than loved. My hope is for our enemies to fear Donald Trump and for his domestic opponents to realize he’s on their side."
The commenter seems to forget that in 'A Bronx Tale,' Sonny was murdered in his own bar (as revenge for a murder he committed years before). The film's main character — a young protagonist whom had been under Sonny's tutelage — returns to the safety and warmth of his honest, bus-driving father and discovered that it's better to be loved than feared.
This misunderstanding of the message of the aforementioned film supports what I fear is at the core of Trump and his followers; The belief that power, bullying and coarseness are more important than compassion, wisdom and moral courage.
6
One constant theme on these pages during President Trumps first year, has been the fears he is threatening freedom of the press. Reading the manny comments that call for the opinions of Trump supporters to be ignored, I find the former claim not to be credible. I am confident most here would be comfortable if Fox News was banned from the airwaves.
The tactics of the left are no longer Democratic. In point of fact, they are turning back to the days of Stalin and Mao..
2
I just found the Trump supporters mostly woefully misinformed ... an example giving him credit for getting ISIS out of Iraq. The new administration just kept the same plan in place that was put in around two to three years ago, and accelerated at certain times. But it was really Pres Obama, his generals and Iran that got this done. Also their work in Syria.
10
"...their almost united focus on temporality ..." - my vote for the single most apropos political observation of the last 364 days
3
Stop the furor. As a liberal Democrat, I stretch my perspective when I listen to Trump followers. Being a fact person, I seek a lack of attention to detail in these supporters, but I saw a firm adherence to Trump. Democrats need to understand and empathize with his supporters! Thank you NYT!
2
When are you running the pro Duterte letters? I don't feel the need to understand Trump's supporters. This just seems to normalize a man whose authoritarian and capricious approach to government are at odds with the tenets of our democracy. This chaos theory of the presidency evokes the final days of the Roman Republic. If Americans don't have affordable health care and if the environment is poisoned these are bad things for all of us. Why is this so hard to understand?
8
I found it very enlightening to read the letters expressing why people stood by the decision to vote for Trump, and appreciate that the Times published them. It's also a little sad that there were only two letters from people who regret having voted for him, although that too is enlightening. And I guess it's also enlightening to see the complaints of people who don't want to hear it, although that willful ignorance is also pretty disappointing. What possible value comes from wanting to know why people view Trump's presidency a success and not wanting others to know?
1
I think the letters should be published, provided they adhere to the normal protocols of the NYT. If the Democrats are to win the next election, they will need to address the real or perceived grievances of the Trump supporters, especially middle-ground conservatives. Providing a common forum for discussion may contribute in some small way to a better understanding of the opposing positions and even contribute to discussions on how to overcome the divide. If North and South Korea can find common ground (however briefly) nothing is impossible in this world.
The letters do nothing but prove there are two vastly different nations shackled regrettably together and to each oner's detriment inside common borders (the only thing they have in common) - each longing to be free of the other. Let it happen. It is time.
3
So much for the intellectual open mind. Horses with blinkers on are able to see far more, especially without all that extra baggage between their ears as well.
Does it matter to these Trumpeters that Trump and his enablers have rescinded many of the EPA regulations designed to keep our air and water clean? That they are preparing for nuclear war? That hundreds of key diplomatic positions are not filled - including ambassadors for Saudi Arabia, Jordan, Libya, Egypt. Trump's outrageous behavior and tweets are distractions from the real dismantling and destruction going on.
7
I'm mixed on the value of giving Trump supporters a forum. Yes, we have to listen to them or we'll never get past the divide. And yes, their anger has legitimacy although narrowing it to undocumented immigrants as many are is into the weeds of racism. Some Trump supporters no doubt want the brakes put on while they absorb the world around them so it's not just loss - of jobs, of community, of security.
It's the messenger that's bad. Like all cons, Donald Trump can read a mark. He can size people up to feed them the exact message they want to hear. Like all good cult leaders he has made them feel important.
It's not complicated. Donald Trump found a pulse of fear based on bigotry in this country and exploited it. And that's why giving his supporters an open forum can be harmful. Their anger may have legitimacy but his is a vigilante kind of anger. That's not okay.
3
I spoke to my uncle recently (he and I never discuss politics because I know that we have different views on our current governor, just as a for instance -- many of which are founded on Jerry Brown being a bit of a rogue during his first time in office -- and he told me quite emphatically, "I have never voted for anyone but a Republican in my life."
This is the man who I know to be a deeply moral man, someone who believes in the big D of democratic principles, the rule of law, the crucial importance of honesty, who would never, in good conscience, tolerate "locker-room jokes" or even curse words....
And yet with those words, he removed any question in my mind that he's struggling to justify the President, even as he tunes in to Fox & Friends just often enough to listen to their lies and obfuscations. It saddens me deeply that Donald Trump is making enough headway with his lies (even though I'm absolutely certain that my uncle has never even heard of Twitter, lol) about so-called faux media that actual, demonstrable facts are "muddied" on a regular basis.
It hurts me that we are so divided as a nation that people who would never normally be willing to invite a man with manners like our President into their homes have become determined to double down on him being in our White House, but there you have it.
They have a right to state their opinions just as much as I do. Thank you for opening a page for them to do so.
3
I appreciate that the Trump supporters had a chance to speak. If nothing else, it was a good effort at 'fair and balanced'. Can't see Fox News doing that. Don't agree with anyone and don't see what they see, but thanks again for giving them a forum.
1
I applaud the NYT for printing these letters. How will we ever understand what the "other side" is thinking if we never hear their thoughts and views.?
I am a liberal democrat that sometimes listens to Glenn Beck and now and then to Rush Limbaugh. I want to try and understand other people. I do draw the line at Hannity and Faux Noise. I do have limits as to how much abuse I will subject myself to.
Thanks again to the NYT. My only suggestion would be to print these same type of responses BEFORE the next election, rather than after the fact. Why are you planning to vote for candidate X?
1
I'm happy and relieved that the NY Times is publishing letters from Trump supporters.
I want to hear what they think, but can't bear the thought of personally approaching my friends and family to ask how they could possibly continue supporting him.
15
I can't get my head around the fact that any thinking person would argue against the open exchange of ideas and opinions, or seek to ban those who hold contrary views from "speaking" in the pages of the NYT. Just curious if those of you espousing this POV would really want to shut out the many people serving in the military or law enforcement who support the President.
I am a Trump supporter, a woman, an entrepreneur, a college graduate, a loving mother, and so much more. On what basis would you restrict our ability to communicate and disagree with each other?
16
So Trump voters had their reasons. I am sure they did. That would be fine if their votes only affected themselves. That is not the case. I am tired of hearing about the “poor trump voters”. If we are not to blame them, then who is to blame?
3
In spite of all the unsubstantiated claims in the Trump supporter letters, I support the New York Times providing a voice to them because we are all in this together.
I think it’s important that everyone feel heard. How else are they going to feel inclined to dig a little deeper?
1
The only way to obtain a government "by and for the people" is for ordinary citizens to have access real, respectful debates among people who disagree.
That's how we can let others fact-check what we strongly believe in, and can exchange arguments and information.
The NYT forum for Trump fans is a perfect example of how to enhance this kind of absolutely crucial debates, so of course, every democracy-loving citizens (liberal or conservative, for or against Trump) should applaud this kind of initiatives.
Moreover, what do liberals actually have to fear here? It's not liberals who are systematically rejecting science, it's conservatives (at least those in DC), so in the worst-case scenario, such a debate doesn't allow liberals to make Trump supporters see the light. So what? At least we will have had a conversation, rather than being merely divided - and nothing is more urgent today than trying to have civil conversations among people who disagree.
And of course, a scientifically proven fact isn't politically biased, whereas most Trump supporters aren't cognitively impaired. So there's actually no reason at all why they wouldn't be sensitive to rational arguments, when explained calmly and respectfully.
By the way, one of the reasons why the GOP wields such a power of its voters and can lie to such an extent, is precisely because those voters tend to hear only one clock. Which is one more reason to invite them over to the NYT once in a while ...
2
I'm struck by the dramatic difference in tone from the pro-Trump and anti-Trump letter writers published in the last two days. The pro-Trump writers didn't bash those on the other side of the fence, they simply explained what they like about what has been done so far and what he is trying to do (while also mentioning their frustration over his Tweeting). The anti-Trump writers largely display attitudes of superiority over Trump supporters - reminding me a lot of the Hillary "deplorables" comments.
I didn't vote for Trump, and I don't count myself as a Trump supporter.
I hope that we can all learn to tone down the personal attacks - if not, the political and social landscape of this country is going to continue to slide further into the gutter. As a media outlet that has been strongly anti-Trump, I applaud the NYT for running yesterday's letters from Trump supporters simply because they may help a few people to reflect on their behavior, and to approach life and their neighbors, friends and family members in a less confrontational way.
25
As a Trump supporter and Times subscriber, I am grateful to the editorial board for printing letters from fellow supporters. I rarely see anything close to my views written in the editorial pages, so the letters' inclusion was a welcome surprise.
The free flow of ideas is one of the (many) reasons that our country is great. That is why I find it disheartening to see the negative reactions from readers regarding the Times decision to publish the letters. My fellow readers have in essence stated that they believe that the millions of us who elected Trump and support him, shouldn't have our voices heard in the political discourse because we're closed-minded, xenophobic bigots who are blindly supporting a maniacal tyrant who is recklessly destroying America.
Or, perhaps, we all don't fit into the "Trump supporter" mold that was created without our consent. It's easier to cast a broad stroke when characterizing something or someone with whom you disagree. Acting in such a way may help one feel more secure and powerful in one's own convictions, but it also stifles one's ability to engage in an increasingly diverse culture and adds clamor to the fractured echo chambers sweeping through the body politic
Our culture is growing increasingly polarized, and true tolerance is a dying discipline. The Times' choice to devote prime "real estate" the letters of Trump supporters was an act of true tolerance, and I laud the editorial board for this decision.
23
I have a Trump supporter in my family and it's not hard to see why he's one. He's college-educated but he couldn't handle the real world and so after about six months on his first job, he ran home to his parents. He lived with them for about 10 years, working minimum wage jobs until they finally kicked him out. After that he continued to work low-paying jobs and, at a few years away from 60, he has nothing saved for retirement. He resents immigrants, POC, Muslims, anyone who's LGBT, women, and anyone else he believes kept him from the life he thinks he deserves. He watches and reads very little news and, not surprisingly, is extremely uninformed. He believes that Trump is responsible for the gains in the stock market, for defeating ISIS, and negotiating great trade deals, yet, like most Trump supporters, cannot name a single thing Trump has done to affect any of the three. He believes that Trump's tax "reform" will help him, except that he lives in a state with high SALT and his taxes will also increase when the tax cuts expire in about eight years. The kindest word I can use to describe him is "ignorant". I'd rather not know more about him than what I already do.
4
Trump is the man for the job at this time and has exceeded my expectations.
Trump has gotten the economy moving again from a president that let the country fall into a depression followed by another who could not have cared less.
Trump's handling of illegal aliens reminds me of reading about ancient countries fighting off the Mongol hordes.
Trump's very pro Israel stance is to be commended.
I support President Trump on the job he is doing and looking forward to the next 7 years of Trump's administration.
4
Try this; read a transcription of his answers to any question (that aren’t prepared for him and written at an elementary student level). And on any topic. Then ask yourself if he’s meeting even the bare minimum functional level for an avg senior citizen.
The utter incompetence is plainly evident.
1
The stronger economy we have was set in motion by the Obama administration. Most bipartisan economists have stated this very clearly. Jared Kushner is on record for saying that: "The reason Donald chose the Republican party is because he thinks they're 'dumb enough to believe me'"....not a very flattering thing to say about your own supporters!
2
It is important to know what makes people tick, including and especially those who are not in agreement with each other. Living in a bubble is willful ignorance.
Does the NY Times assume that its readers are choosing to ignore right-wing thought - even extreme right-wing thought? For my part as a progressive liberal Democrat, I participate on a blog site that skews Republican, including many supporters of President Trump.
I don't need the NY Times to tell me what Republicans or Conservatives or Tea Party advocates think or to direct me to a select few of them. They already have plenty of outlets to express their views.
Dispense with attempts at balance and continue to advocate for truth. Surely you have a mission statement somewhere that directs you to do exactly that.
24
Can we really have a dialogue with people who want to toss out productive residents of our country, many of them brought here as children, who have gone on to succeed , become educated, build businesses, pay taxes? Who want to end Obamacare because it supports Planned Parenthood and the hundreds of thousands of episodes of medical care delivered by that organization? Are we really gonna celebrate a little more testosterone from this head of a dysfunctional family, grifter, grabber, with women lined up for their day in court hoping he'll answer charges of assault? Not me. I really cannot parse that thought process.
You'd think we might come to agreement on the fact that we'll all need water, air, food. But no. This too is up for grabs. Greedy, crazy, or stupid. A mixed basket of deplorables. The girl was right.
12
I assume the letter writers who praise Trump must at least read the NY Times. That in itself is good. It's far better than getting all ones news and opinions from Fox news. In regard to those who do, however, it's extremely important to try to reach them, not just give up on them. Because in reality, the vast majority of Americans share so many more interests in common than not, such as a desire for decent jobs, affordable health care, housing and a good education, opportunities to advance in life, a healthy and safe environment, security in retirement, to leave our country and the Earth better than we found it so that our children and grandchildren may enjoy a bright future, etc. The ulterior agenda of Fox news is to hone in on wedge issues, in order to exploit the prejudices of their viewers, fan their anger, and turn us against each other. The object of the NY Times, therefore, should be to do the opposite, to try to bring us together. A benefit of the letters is they can help better understand Trump supporters, separate out the assumptions and conclusions of theirs that are simplistic and erroneous, and to learn from the above how to better get across what is true.
12
Attitudes and opinions , especially political one are very hard to change a well known psychological fact. By giving voice to these views it can provide a way for politicians to support candidates that can mount campaigns that can attract voters who oppose these beliefs
2
I suppose you could find the same lack of appreciation for balance in conservative papers; but it would be as short-sighted and wrong there as it is here. We will never heal our broken politics and move forward again sustainably unless we carve out a FAR more expansive ideological no-man's land within which we can hammer-out compromises. Without understanding the other side, you can have no idea where that no-man's land might begin or end.
If we pass through four or eight years of Trump and fail to make functional again a politics that has been dysfunctional now for many years, then we will have missed an historic opportunity and suffered the pain for no good reason.
13
"We will never heal our broken politics and move forward again sustainably unless we carve out a FAR more expansive ideological no-man's land within which we can hammer-out compromises"
.Ok Richard: We will watch and learn from the Great Compromiser, DJT, how to do that. The closest he comes to a compromise is changing his mind five minutes at a time.
In the meantime, we will remember one of his more outrageous campaign remarks, that he could shoot someone on 5th avenue and still would not lose his base. I think he understands his side just perfectly.
I remember in 2008 when prominent GOP lawmakers said frankly "It is not so much that we must succeed, but that they must fail."
I think the 'promise" in compromise is right there.
2
Searcher:
The lesson that a Republican Congress needs to learn is that Trump will sign anything they put before him, in order to claim "coup" with legislation under his belt. He is a past master at brinksmanship, but he'll sign the bill.
Many commenters here point out that the Times' presentation of voices from Trump's base illustrates a key to the divide in our culture: on one hand many Trump supporters perceive and fear a rapidly changing world that is not accommodating to them, and so for various reasons they cling to his promises of quick and "beautiful" solutions to unemployment and inadequate health care, of revival of dying industries (e.g. coal and oil), and to "restore" America to some semblance of the dubious illusions (such as our "exceptionalism") that have sustained American confidence since World War Two.
A good many Trump's supporters base their support of him on notions unsupported by facts, on racial prejudices they don't want to own up to, and on unexpressed shame and self-loathing because of their failure to thrive in contemporary America. Who can't empathize them, for whom the issue is not being able to make a decent life in the USA for themselves and their family no matter how hard they try?
Nobody wishes ill to Trump supporters who face hardship, but what is exasperating is they choose Fox News over their own self-interest and reject the "liberals" who are actually on their side. If only they'd vote for leaders whose records prove that they're on the side of Americans who are struggling.
86
"If only they'd vote for leaders whose records prove that they're on the side of Americans who are struggling."
And in what political party would these sorts of leaders be found? Those fully paid for on the left are no better.
I agree, especially with the recognition of their unrecognized shame. They are extremely prideful people who have very little reason to be proud. But they are unwilling to accept any blame for their own situation. Question for us reality-based folks is, how do we get people like these to accept that their problems are both self-created (e.g. “We don’t want new job training! We want our old coal jobs back, but without the unions that made them possible!”) and made worse by the deceptive, blame-shifting propaganda they’ve swallowed in order to avoid admitting that what they really want to say is “I’m doomed. Somebody, somewhere, somehow, Make ME Great Again. Please.”
1
Did you even read the letters? Most seemed to come from relatively well-off individuals, not the stereotypical blue collar worker fallen on hard times complete with racial prejudices etc.
I'm so curious to know what the main news source is for the different folks who wrote in to support Trump. The 2016 election threw a floodlight on a divided America — one largely created though the power of separate news narratives. The information gap explains why half of the country seems to have lost it's mind —they're hearing a very different storyline. If we want to regain stable majorities in the House and the Senate, we need to bridge the communication divide.
29
This is really the problem. I do t know when people started watching Fox and when Fox and other internet sites became widely-accepted for certain groups. It’s scary to hear the lack of understanding. I saw it in the letters. I understand that people were angry and felt left behind, but when did it become ok to alternative ‘facts’. Critical thinking and debate do t seem to exist any more. Religious views are also being forced on the majority. Whatever happened to separation of Church and State?
2
I follow some Trump supporter's twitter feeds and was shocked to learn that many people are absolutely certain that the "MSM" is conspiring to keep the public from finding out that President Obama was born in Kenya and that he was doing the bidding of ISIS while in office, among other "truths." I thought that even Trump had given up on birtherism but many apparently people have not!
Thanks for asking. I can tell you for me it was The New York Times. The Times constantly created a straw-man version of DJT and delighted in setting fire to it over...and over...and over. All to the unmitigated delight of the readers that posted in comments section like this. Everything Trump said was cast in the worst possible light ("Trump Said All Mexicans Rapists!!!" gimme a break) with no effort made to understand the underlying sentiment (ie people that illegally cross borders are not always the best and brightest their home countries have to offer and we'd be crazy to not recognize that. NYT *never* tried to explain it that way). That's just one example--and the list is long. I do sincerely appreciate you asking the question however and like you am hopeful that we can bridge the communications chasm.
The letters praising trump and those expressing furor over the forum continue to show the deep divide in the nation and the difficulty in understanding the other side.There should be philosophical differences in political parties. It's what makes our country and gov run. But what has happened over the years is that these differences have hardened into 'I'm right and you're wrong' with no space to work out the differences.
While having a hard time understanding how people can praise trump, the vitriol from the 'furor' letters was equally dismaying. Unfortunately we are not going to see another Gandhi in our lifetime, so we need to figure out how to work together. We need to elect people who are willing to work across the aisle and know how to tone down the rhetoric.
25
It's difficult though when only one side has any interest in finding common ground and working together. If you have one person who's willing to compromise and another who won't compromise unless forced, the willing compromiser will lose out every single time. Also, they don't have the facts on their side. It's like saying an adult should take a two year old's opinion into consideration before making an important decision about her finances. That's why I don't see the point in trying to understand Trump supporters anymore.
3
I cannot believe how threatened the educated NY Times readership feels because they had to read half a dozen pro-Trump letters.
You want to win the 2018 election for Democrats? You've got to understand what those who support Trump think and say. How can you argue against people's views by calling him Drumpf and making jokes about his hair?
If they all get their talking points from Fox News, shouldn't those who oppose them know what is being said and what evidence is relevant to their claims?
53
We have been hearing from these know-nothings ever since Trump announced his candidacy -- two and a half years now. I'm sick and tired of hearing their side. I would respect a child's opinion over theirs. They don't want to know the truth. If they haven't wised up to Trump by now, they are lost souls.
4
"You've got to understand what those who support Trump think and say."
I think a lot of us do....better than those who supported Trump, in fact.
4
Not threatened, just tired. And it's hard NOT to know the Fox talking points - I don't need to hear them again here.
Why not rebut the accomplishment claims of Trump supporters:
1. Removing regulations means no oversight for clean water, air pollution, pesticiides on our crops. aviation safety, et.al.
2. The tax decrease for middle class is temporary whereas for the 1% it is permanent
46
1. It's not a given that reducing regulations will eliminate oversight. Some argue that regulations went to far and unnecessarily impeded reasonable business practices.
2. The tax decrease for corporations is permanent. Personal tax reductions for all income levels are temporary.
5
Though you tried to correct the previous comment, the tax decrease is permanent for a privileged group, while the majority of hard working people will be paying more in 2025. The majority does not enjoy the same treatment and are scammed for 8 years so the Republicans are re-elected in 2018 and this President in 2020.
1
I don't disagree with that - in terms of the wealthier benefiting disproportionately from reduced corporate tax. There does seem to be a world-wide 'race to the bottom' in corporate taxation. That said, it's critical that opponents 'get their facts straight' - and learn some basic economics. While it's sometimes been exploitative, capitalism has also benefited humanity greatly. See Jonathan Haidt: "Three Stories About Capitalism" for understanding.
I read these letters this morning, and simply felt nauseated.
I can't believe that a roaring stock market, a one-sided tax bill, and a conservative Supreme Court pick (not his--should have been President Obama's!), denial of climate science, and insults heard around justify the vulgarity, ugliness, cruelty, and vindictiveness we're seeing inform every single public policy of this ignorant, mean, racist.
164
The greatest takeaway for me is that it's incredibly hard for people to admit--or even see--when they are wrong.
71
These Americans deserve to have their opinions. The man they voted for is toxic to the country and has or had people working for him who lied about their interactions with Russia. Trump probably is guilty of money laundering on a huge scale and he is trying to destroy press freedoms. His administration is destroying the park system and has eliminated net neutrality. The people who support Trump will never change their minds about him. I have about as much interest in what they think about Trump as I have about what my dog thinks about his tennis ball.
110
mark
I think you will develop interest when in a short period of time the entire anti-Trump movement collapses.
I am glad that the letters were published but at the same time, deeply saddened by them. They reveal how Trump supporters process information concerning his administration. They all showcase selective reasoning in that only specific elements are considered in their decision making. They all completely ignore the things that are driving the anti-Trump crowd crazy.
When this happens there can be no formation of common ground if the ground isn't even recognized. We can argue that the reasons the economy is doing well have little to do with Trump but that will have no effect. For example, Trump claims that his tax cuts are boosting the economy. They haven't taken place yet. It will take months to see any effect. This level of analysis is meaningless in this environment.
The destruction to our institutions, the free press, liberty, racial equality, DACA kids, the environment, international relations, are not part of their processing.
As long as this condition remains, no understanding can be developed between the two sides. Only power will determine the outcomes. See you all in Nov. 2018.
174
Bruce --- You are "deeply saddened" by letters from people like me, i.e., Trump supporters. Guess what? I am "deeply saddened" by what you have to say as well! Trump has had little to do with the improved economy? Wow. He is the cause of the free press being destroyed? Not the media's willingness to push an agenda rather than dig deep? As far as issues like immigration, I am able to distinguish between legal immigration (married to an immigrant so I know what the process was like) and illegal. Racial equality? If liberals were honest, they would see that American minorities are hardest hit by unrestrained illegal immigration. There are so many points of disagreement, but no reason to disparage one another. I do not doubt your sincerity. Why doubt mine?
5
The stereotypical flyover country bemoans not being understood by either coast, but makes no effort to reciprocate. So it is with these poor souls who feel so misunderstood by the rest of us that you had to give them an extensive platform.
72
I don't understand why people expect to be understood in terms of the Bible.
I read the Trump supporters' letters, then went to read the letters from those who now regretted supporting him. But there were only two of those, as opposed to the dozen or more from supporters. Not sure what the paucity from those with buyer's remorse means—but would have liked to see more from the less satisfied. As far as the happy supporters go, most of them don't like him personally but are happy with what his administration has done so far. Since Trump's actual policies have mostly hewed to the GOP establishment's agenda, I take it to mean they would have been equally happy with any Republican who was for small government, lower taxes, less regulation. Perhaps there's a deviation from traditional Republican policy if the Trump supporters like his anti-free trade stance, since that has been part of Republican ideology for a long time. Anyway, were you really only able to find two Trump voters who have been disappointed? Given the trend in special elections so far, his support seems to be softening, even though his approval is still in the mid-30s. I would love to hear from more disappointed supporters.
37
That's right, most people who supported Trump still do; that's why you can't find more letters from disappointed deplorables. It's wishful thinking that his base is abandoning him, a theme the media has been trying all year, just like he was always supposed to be hitting a ceiling throughout the campaign. His approval rating is in the mid 30s because it's zero among Democrats. Among Republicans overall, it's still in the 80s, and that doesnt cover all his supporters who are independents.
1
My guess is that few of the people who regret voting for Trump are willing to admit their mistake. It's not easy to admit that you were wrong, especially publicly.
1
maybe former Trump supporters are afraid or embarrassed to go public.
I was amazed by the letters that supported Trump. They were literate and revealed writers who had been educated. And yet they lacked something. It points to something essentially wrong with our educational system that literate people can support the nonsense and inchoate dangers of this administration: Can't they see the importance of a free press ? Can't they understand the possible fall of a government that rejects science---a government that removes regulations meant to protect us from all sorts of calamities--a government that ignores the world and selfishly thinks only of itself? I think that our educational system is failing. Our educational system has veered away from humanities --where jobs are scarce--and embraced STEM --where jobs are plentiful. But in the humanities we develop the critical sense to distinguish the fake and irrational from the rational. In the STEM courses we are taught the best procedures for achieving results--with little introspection and back-and-forth thinking seeking the truth. So we get literate letter writers who can accept nonsense, as long as they like whatever results--with little thought as to whether these results came about because of Trump.
125
Oh please. Do not blame STEM courses for this. None of the letter writers thinks anything like a true scientist about Trump and his administration. Basically they could not politically reason their way out of a paper bag and it shows. I strongly support education in the humanities, but that will not solve the thinking problems so aptly demonstrated in these letters. And BTW, as an excellent analysis some weeks past demonstrated, maybe in an article in the Education section published from time to time, in most STEM sectors, jobs are not plentiful at all.
You could be a physics professor and not apply the kind of reasoning necessary to do science to your political decision making.
2
Science denial started with the Bush administration. Everyone seems to have developed amnesia. Nothing bad ever happened until Trump came along.
1
Nodding my head, yes! yes! yes! at your last sentence.
;-)
I am deeply morally opposed to both Mr. Trump and the Republican Party (and the Democrats aren't far behind, for their seeming lack of effort to bring their party and supporters on board), but I think showing both sides of an appalling divide creates opportunities to balance our thinking and tone down the rhetoric. Being able to hear and think at the same time, all points of view, gives us a clearer map of the field and a better chance to craft a government worthy of the name. Please continue to show both sides of this brouhaha.
68
It is curious that this week, of all weeks of the year, you want people to "tone down the rhetoric."
Kind of what people advised Martin Luther King to do 50 years ago.
55
I was fascinated to read articulate letters from Trump supporters, and I applaud the Times for publishing them. Now that much of the conservative punditocracy - Brooks, Douthat, Rubin, Will et al - has become anti-Trump, I'd like to see the Times hire a columnist who can contribute thoughtful pieces considering whatever good might come of this presidency (if only in response to it). My best takeaway from these letters is that there are many American voters who've decided that a president who can lower their tax bill (at least for awhile), tighten immigration laws (regardless of the human cost), project a John Wayne face to the world, and (not least) make his opponents crazy on a daily basis outweighs any qualms about his character or "presidential fitness." (Indeed, Trump, as they see it, has re-defined "fitness") These may be selfish, short-sighted positions, but they're not irrational or trivial, and We Who Can't Stand Trump would do well to listen. Keep this Times feature going!
22
The conservative punditocracy was always anti Trump. They have their agenda, and it never had anything to do with Trump.
9
Ok, but why? What will happen if Trump supporters start to feel like progressives respect their opinions? Will it cause them to moderate their views and consider the needs of people who don't agree with them? I think progressives need to just accept that Trump supporters are playing us when they ask for our understanding. They know it's part of our standard operating procedure to try to be fair - to reach across the aisle and understand people, to hear and respect everybody's opinion. They know that doing this slows us down and makes it hard for us to get anything done decisively. Meanwhile, they are all in lock step behind their king with their Fox talking points in hand (who knew so many people cared about the location of the US embassy in Israel?). What we really need to understand is how to combat that kind of uncritical unity without becoming just as bad.
3
I appreciate these letters. We cannot have change unless we understand where we really are starting from. This is a good idea.
But I have a request. Come talk to me and others who voted for Clinton but weren't voting FOR Clinton but rather, voting against Trump. Assuming that a monolith of millions happily voted for her is just as wrong as assuming everyone who voted for him fits neatly into one box. The democrats remain in trouble and all the answers do not lie with persuading Trump voters they are wrong.
106
"Trump is worse" lost last time. Sure it was a near run thing, but it should have been a blow out win against Trump.
There is much to reflect on, and it isn't how stupid the other guy is. It certainly isn't to drive off even further away as many of those voters as possible.
10
We needed to hear their voices, misguided and wrongheaded though we believe them to be.
I've lived in red and blue environments and while I prefer blue, no question about it, there's also no question that we cannot win over hearts and minds without listening to them first.
So thanks, New York Times. I can't say I was thrilled to read the comments from Trump voters but it was a good move to publish them.
31
I commend and appreciate the Times for publishing the letters of the Trump supporters. I'm reminded of Steven Covey's classic tome, 7 Habits of Highly Effective People and one of the habits -- Seek first to understand rather than to be understood. I'd like to be open minded enough to hear and try to understand why folks still support President Trump or the policies he espouses. I may not agree with them but I'd like to understand their rationale.
22
You would probably discover that many of them agree with you on many things. Many could be won to policies you like, and candidates who will do them.
They also think you were as deluded by a political charlatan as you think they were. You may all be right about that.
4
As difficult as it is for me to understand the other side, I found it important to read the opinions of Trump's supporters. After all, we are a democracy and everyone has the right to voice their opinion. For that I thank you the New York Times.
22
I am not a Trump supporter, but I think that it is helpful for the New York Times to have printed readers' letters in support of the Trump presidency. It is helpful to read what the other side thinks, and this article adds stature and credibility to the Times.
While I believe hat the economic recovery strongly took hold in the Obama years, I agree that the economy has had an excellent year. Were a Democratic president in office s/he would take credit for that, so the Trump administration is entitled to do so, too.
On foreign policy: I think that Trump has had a dismal year, from insulting allies to the alleged s- house comment. It was the Obama administration that started the containment of ISIS in Iraq and Syria. As well, ISIS has retaliated by continuing to export terrorism.
That said, good to hear from the other side periodically.
14
It seems that the Trump supporters who are thrilled by their man's performance have thoroughly bought into his view. The credit him with turning the economy around and making it grow as if the 7 years of growth and falling unemployment under Mr. Obama never happened, i.e., they believe Trump when he says that he inherited "a mess." The same is true re ISIS. Although Trump's giving more independence to the general in the field appears to have been a good mood, it is a disconnect from reality to believe that Trump "defeated ISIS" as if all the fighting and driving them back over several years did not matter at all. It seems that in the mind of some Mr. Trump is playing the Christ to Mr. Obama's anti-Christ.
123
"it is a disconnect from reality to believe that Trump "defeated ISIS" as if all the fighting and driving them back over several years did not matter at all. "
Hey, during Obama's 2012 campaign he claimed he ended the war in Iraq and left it with a stable government. Delusions are nothing new.
What's interesting to me is that the media powers-that-be seem to believe unanimously that those of us who don't admire Donald Trump need to better understand those who do - but no one in the media ever calls on Trump's admirers to better understand the rest of us.
I'm all for understanding each other. But why should the obligation be so entirely one-sided? If mutual understanding is important to democracy, doesn't the obligation fall equally on everyone?
politicsbyeccechomo.wordpress.com
269
Ecce Homo is partly mistaken, but not entirely; there should be more discussion of the real issues that many people (who are not billiionaires) have, such as the disappearance of good jobs. (Which Clinton had much-ignored policy about.) That is why I support the Times' effort to let Trump voters express themselves.
1
@Thomas Zaslavsky - this doesn't seem to be an answer to Ecce Homo's question. Are you saying you feel that Trump supporters are being called upon to understand the opposition? By whom? Is it anyone they might listen to? Also, memory confirmed by a quick google search shows that there have been about a zillion thoughtful articles in the Times and other legitimate media about the disappearance of good jobs and other real issues that many people who are not billionaires have.
1
This has been true for quite some time now, as far I can tell. Interest in understanding opposition views, self-doubt and criticism seem to be in evidence only among liberals at this point, certainly only among liberal media outlets. There seem to be very few (any?) voices on the right decrying media bubbles or wondering if there has been a failure to give equal time to opposing values. Rural america has been treated to a monolithic echo-chamber of right-wing radio and newsprint for more than a decade and there seems to be little worry or hand-wringing over it. It must be nice not to think too hard about how we came to this cold civil war, or feel any responsibility for defusing it.
1
There are many assertions of "evident facts" (re "accomplishments") by the writers but the context did not allow them, nor were they apparently encouraged, to argue their
points using references to facts. They merely are content to itemize talking points (Isis down, tax bill passed, economy up) with no analysis what role
il duce did or did not play in it. Nor do they explain why they are sure the tax bill is such an accomplishment. Nor do any address why
what is happening at EPA and Energy is such a terrific change.
So I am curious, as are many commenters,
about how they have come to know what they believe they know as a verifiable fact. Also, I am very interested to learn what sources of information they have used during this year that helped form their opinion that all is just
wonderful, and will be even better, sooner than later.
Facts are one thing of course, Values are another. The group of pleased
voters asserts, explicitly or implicitly, a certain set of values but they
do not feel the need to defend their relative weighting of these to
other competing values that could also be used to make sense of our year long nightmare. It would therefore be quite interesting if some civil
dialogue could begin around such a theme.
For starters, there seems zero concern about climate change and
the year long effort to overturn every prior effort to do something
reasonably significant about it. Why does this concern
the letter writers so little, if at all?
105
Yes - these are all good questions. I'd be way more interested in seeing this kind of analysis than just reading a handful of people's regurgitations of stuff from Fox News.
I'm am happy to read the comments of Trump supporters after the first year. What I would have liked to have had them explain are the following:
- How did Trump influence the stock market increases? I googled the 10-year graph of the Dow Jones, and the slope of the increasing line through the random ups and downs always present in these graphs is fairly constant from 2009 (when Obama started) until now.
-How did Trump influence job growth? CNN reported in Sept 2017, "How is Trump faring on a straight year-over-year basis? He lags Obama there, too. There have been 1,189,000 jobs created under his watch so far, compared to 1,422,000 between February and August 2016."
-What policies did Trump implement that influenced unemployment? The unemployment rate fell steadily from 9.9% in 2009 (near the beginning of the recession) to 4.7% in 2016 (end of Obama's terms). It has fallen a bit further to 4.1% during Trump's first year, hardly anything different and again, what specifically did Trump do that had any influence?
-What did Trump do to "defeat" ISIS? We were already closing in on them along with the Iraqis when Trump took over and it was clear that they were being pushed out. So that continued. What did Trump do?
-Trump appointed some judges, as do all presidents. Trump has not filled an incredible number of positions or let people go in many government departments.
No evidence presented of how Trump influenced the touted accomplishments. To me, that is hype over substance.
373
Well said! Anyone that can be bothered to read a graph can see plainly that those economic indicators so often cited by supporters are in fact directly continuing the trends set during the previous administration.
On the ISIS point, one could argue that the increased tempo of bombing helped accelerate the reclamation of the territory they held (though I personally agree it was local boots on the ground that did much more to finish the job). One way or another, that bombing came at a tremendous cost -- by July of last year, we killed nearly as many civilians as as during the entire Obama tenure. About 80 civilians were killed per month in the Obama era, 360 per month under Trump. This was sadly underreported by our supposedly "leftist" media, though I imagine it would do little to faze the MAGA crowd.
Unfortunately, the gloating reports of ISIS's death are overstated -- while they have been routed from their pseudo-caliphate, it's probably wise to remember that they remain a threat as a terrorist organization.
3
I was pleased the Times printed letters from Trump supporters. The complaint that the Times has been anti-Trump has this validity: that we need to hear more from Trump supporters to know why people support Trump, and even more to let them participate in a dialog, and letters in their own words are an excellent way to find out. I do think most of them are living a fantasy, but how would we know that if they didn't tell us what they like about him?
I suggest doing this again every couple of weeks. As for those who think flat-earthers should get equal time, I would agree if flat-earthers were running the country.
21
But it's actually really easy to get this information - there's a whole television network dedicated to airing these opinions. Why do they need to be put on display here, absent any analysis? Wouldn't it have been more interesting to have a reporter interview some Trump supporters and follow up on their talking points with questions about how they reached these opinions? Say flat-earthers were running the country - what do you really get out of hearing them say yet again that they think the earth is flat because that's all they can see from where they're standing? The subject is worth covering, extensively -- I just question the value of doing one of these Trump praise roundups again.
3
It's all about values. Stock market up? Check. Corporations more profitable? Check. Standing tough to enemies? Check. Backing out of mealymouthed commitments to allies? Check. Looks all good as of now. BUT...
Do we want profits in the short run that leave ourselves open to disasters whose direct cause is a softening of necessary regulations? How many oil spills, polluted rivers, and collapsed buildings must we witness before we see regulations are there for our own safety?
Do we want to lower tax revenues when we desperately need funding for a crumbling infrastructure?
Do we want to further misunderstanding of those living in other nations and having different cultures to such a point that all chances for cooperation, compromise, and the practice of simple human decency become nil?
That is what the short-term, small gains, long-term huge potential losses of this be-tough-to-all, America first policy is giving us.
Trump supporters, I ask in all sincerity, Is this what you want? In your Heart of hearts do you see this as the best we can do for our country? Are these policies the best vehicle for making our country great?
86
In trying to make sense of all of this (or at least some part of it)...and in light of living among many who buy into the current administration hook, line and sinker:
1) I certainly understand the frustration and alienation; in some regards, I feel the same myself (even if I end up in a different place); but
2) President Trump's pitiful performance (by any rational measure, other than adulatory conjecture) defies any attempt to find value - it's not just his coarseness, his intellectual vacuity, his self-absorption, his pathological need to be continuously reaffirmed or his unimpeachable record of turning on each and every colleague, supporter and/or subcontractor who has ever fallen into (and then out of) his orbit; it's his unbroken record of gyroscopically-challenged perspectives and viewpoints. The man simply has no center, and to declare oneself aligned with him automatically sets in motion an inconsistency that is inevitable...and often quite immediate. How can you be a fan/supporter of someone who stands for nothing, except himself? To declare oneself a supporter is not to align with a philosophy or a program, but with a personality.
Russians? C'mon, the man is Chairman Mao all over...except his Little Book is Black instead of Red. But it's still a personality cult.
63
You had me until you used the word "unimpeachable." We simply can't apply that to Trump in any context.
1
We can't know the race of the letter writers who did not present a picture, but those who did are all white - a true cross-section of Americans. I wonder what these same people would write if you asked them about the 8 years of the Obama presidency.
30
I suspect the readership of the NYT and commentators on this piece are largely white
2
I am HORRIFIED. . . . .
. . . . .that ANYONE would object. . . . .
. . . .to letters from Trump supporters appearing in The New York Times.
Do I like Mr. Trump? I do not. Did he get my vote? He did not. Two young ladies in my immediate family cried and cried when the election results came in.
And so did I. A few days later, talking with one of them on the phone.
But come on! Millions--no, TENS of millions of Americans ARE and REMAIN ardent supporters of Mr. Donald J. Trump.
Only a tiny handful are members of the KKK--that accursed organization! Only a tiny handful are so-called "white supremacists." I know a number of solid Trump supporters--I've got one in my immediate family.
All of them--and I"m being honest here--ALL of them are thoroughly decent, upstanding Americans and human beings. In a number of cases, as the saying is, they "held their nose" and voted for the least objectionable of the two candidates. Mr. Trump's deficiencies as a human being are, of course, a matter of public record. He has been in the public eye for---how long?--thirty, thirty five years at least.
But in the teeth of all this, my friends and family member felt strongly: this man will do the United States more good than his opponent.
I totally disagree.
But in all honesty: if I am unable even to LISTEN to or ACKNOWLEDGE the opinions and arguments of those I disagree with . . ;. .
. . .I'd better cash in my chips as an American,
And I'd rather not.
97
Well said. Thank you.
14
The 2016 election threw a floodlight on a divided America — one largely created though the power of separate news narratives. The information gap explains why half of the country seems to have lost it's mind —they're hearing a very different storyline. If we want to regain stable majorities in the House and the Senate, we need to bridge the communication divide.
3
You may have thoroughly decent family and friends who voted for a man who is anything but decent or honest. What they tell themselves is their business but it does not erase real world damage being done in real time by the lies and indecency of this man. Doing damage is not the same as not doing damage.
“Why do you keep asking questions of Trump voters? Who cares what they think?”
Yeah, they’re only a voting block who put the man in office. They only fear for the future of the country as much as you do, but from a different perspective.
Who cares what they think? You do, or you wouldn’t have written your letter.
17
Here's the thing. They've been telling us what they think for two years. The idea that mainstream media has that there's some big secret out there about why Trump supporters support Trump is just ridiculous. Obviously, if you voted for the man, you liked his ideology. And you've, mostly, gotten what he promised. So--big surprise--you're happy. What IS the question here, exactly?
1
Mr. Kline: "Who cares what they [Trump voters] think?"
Hillary didn't. See what that brought upon us.
40
And yet she won the popular vote. Funny how that works...
I really think it's in bad taste to ridicule those who have stuck their necks out to express a viewpoint. A serious dialogue is more appropriate. I did notice that some detail was lacking to back their belief yet they could be asked to expand their comments so that we could see the bigger picture.
20
The consistent thing I here from Trump supporters is that "the economy is doing better"'
The consistent answer I pose to them is " oh, so you got a pay raise and prices have dropped at the supermarkey". Yes, the economy is booming, ....for Trump and the rest of the CEO's, not for the bulk of Americans. They continue to believe it will "trickle down" to them.
29
Right now the stock market is going nuts, but only because of de-regulation. Companies are now freer to pollute the environment, break the rules and cheat employees, and they're celebrating.
The question for me is not why the NYT chose to run these letters. It is why after there is a new president, the NYT feels the need to go after the views of the far right no matter who the newly elected president is.
After Obama's 2008 win, the NYT was filled with articles telling us what the Tea Party and its supporters were all about. After Trump, the NYT is filled with articles telling us what Trump voters are all about.
What would have to happen for the NYT to consider the apparently radical move of featuring more-left-than-center voices in the way it seems to feel so obligated to do for more-right-than-center?
132
As much as I find 80% of what Trumpers say to be utter nonsense that's often devoid of any substantive facts, I also think it's important to not summarily write off the importance of letting them say it. Part of dialogue is listening, which is something we on the left don't seem to want to do. We should dismiss the arguments and ideas of Trumpers after we've considered them and dismantled them with facts and reason. I find it disturbing to see how many commenters can't make it past the fact that they're Pro-Trump opinions, and simply resort to labeling those they disagree with as racists, idiots, and monsters. As much as Trump supporters may have the wrong idea on many issues, anyone who opposes free speech, open dialogue, and a marketplace of ideas (even controversial ones) is themselves a de facto Trump supporter given his deep hatred of press freedoms and the freedom of people to criticize him.
12
As I read the letters of Trump supporters and the responses of NYT readers who are part of the resistance (Myself included in the latter), I cannot stop thinking of the many German civilians and military officials who allowed Hitler to move forward with his unthinkable horrific atrocities.
It seems incomprehensible to me that 40% of Americans can still have a favorable view of Trump. But then again, the German citizenry followed their leader's orders and methodically killed 15,000.000 innocent civilians in addition to the 5+ million others who died fighting for his great cause.
71
The only reason this is even a thing - besides the cynical viewpoint that the Times seeks to lure Trumpist eyeballs - is because this is the most corrupt, incompetent, divisive, dangerous executive branches in all of our lifetimes and approximately 2/3 of the country sees it that way, quite clearly.
However, it doesn't require handing over the Times editorial page to Trumpists to understand how or what they think. One can view the comment section on any newspaper, or watch Fox News, or visit any number of websites or blogs. The New Yorker has written on the subject at length.
Generally speaking, Trumpists fall into 1 and/or 2 camps. 1) Completely self-interested, selfish, 1-dimensional people who will gladly trade the overall welfare of the country for the advance of 1 or 2 pet issues. 2) simple people who don't understand basic facts and are easily manipulated by propaganda.
Not coincidentally, both of these describe Trump. And though they'd never admit it, they love that see themselves in him.
82
I carefully read all the letters, did you? They seem to be from educated, thoughtful people, readers of the NYT.
Enough. I am sick to death of hearing about what Trump voters think. I don't care. I don't respect them and I see right through them. They should take responsibility for their own lives instead of whining and blaming others. They embrace hatred and bullying and an obviously unfit "president". Not to mention the fact that he cheated to win. Please, stop telling us what they think. I could read Breitbart (Whitebart) if I wanted to know.
129
I think you are stereotyping Trump voters!
No, describing them.
I don't understand why letters to the editor were given the same status as the professionals who usually write for your editorial page. Nowhere do you discuss the education, experience, intelligence, and expertise of the letter writers. If you want conservative voices then give space to the serious columnists, reporters who strive for excellence. This seemed a silly waste of time.
14
Honestly, I was "this close" to canceling my subscription to the Times until I heard about its publication of these letters from a different political perspective. Most of the time, editorials and letters in the Times are from folks living in an echo chamber. I am one of those who voted against Hillary rather than for Trump. Is he rude, crude and socially unacceptable? Absolutely! (I've known 3 year olds with more impulse control, and wish someone would give Kelly a kill switch for Trump's Twitter account.) But, has Trump and his administration accomplished much in his first year that is unarguably good for Americans? Absolutely! ISIS has no physical caliphate. Our economy is on fire. (Obama apologist economists said a 2% or lower GDP was the new normal to excuse Obama's measly average 1.8%GDP over 8 years.) My favorite stat is that the unemployment rate for African-Americans is the lowest since records have been kept! Just today we heard that unemployment claims are the lowest in 45 years. If this kind of great economic news continues, I might even be able to vote FOR President Trump next time. --BTW to my Democrat friends, Nancy Pelosi makes Donald Trump look like Demosthenes!!! If you want to attack Trump's mental acuity, you have got to get rid of her!
25
Do you think all this started the day Trump took office and none of it was happening the day before?
Do you think it's possible that, especially when it comes to the economy, all presidents of both parties get both more blame and more credit than they deserve?
4
The quotes you mention regarding low unemployment for African Americans are obviously result of policy placed prior to Trump taking office....surely you don’t think his ascendency to the presidency on Jan 20 th resulted in a precipitous decrease?
4
No. I think it started the minute Trump was elected as the phenomenal market run up showed. The market always looks forward and business realized that they would no longer have a president with his boot on the neck of the private sector. Once Trump got in office, the real work started in the form of deregulation. You clearly have no idea how over regulation and inefficient regulation cripples the private sector, especially small businesses that can’t afford “compliance officers” and entire departments. Finally, with long overdue tax reform, the economy will really ignite this year. (Just see what Apple announced this week for starters.) Obama had absolutely nothing to do with that, my friends.
2
As a Trump supporter, I appreciate your attempt to report to the public in a way that may lead to more fair, and balanced journalism. Obviously this a printing of letters, and not a report of factual Trump infomration, but at least it appears to be some type of an olive branch? I don't know where journalism turned the corner, and decided to push agendas, instead of reporting facts, but clearly it is a reality in these times. It often amazes me that your followers don't seem to mind your persuation, and insult to thier intelligence, but clearly what your doing is being accepted for now. I am going to take this printing of letters from Trump supporters, as an attempt to understand why half of this country feels forgotten. I hope your intentions were genuine, if in fact that was your goal.
30
If a hundred people follow football, and only two follow curling, it will follow that the newspaper will give more coverage to football.
Now replace "a hundred people follow football" with "Trump does a hundred bad/dumb/immoral things" and "two follow curling" with "Trump does two things right", and you'll see why the papers are slanted in one direction.
The reporting of the facts seems biased to you because you want to be able to justify your 2016 vote. I hope you open your eyes by 2020 and don't help give this cretin another four years.
38
"half of this country feels forgotten"
Granted, but how many of that half have begun to understand what is going on across the globe today? Many will have experienced job-loss, declining income, increased household debt, industrial rustbelt, shrinking opportunities, all of which feed into a deep sense of aggrievement -- "we've been forgotten". But absolutely nothing djt has proposed is, even at best, anything more than quick-fix, stop-gap. Thus, under the new tax regime, some may feel they are better off, for what, a few years? What about their children?
POTUS himself clearly has a very poor grasp of the underlying economic and social factors, lashes out incoherently at multinational commerce and longs for more migrants from Norway. His possibly more savvy adjutants will not sway him towards reason, fact-based analyses, wrestling with the real issues, because anything resembling a real solution is simply anathema to the GOP. So the US lurches forward, and downward, large swathes of the electorate under-educated about the world they live in, deluded about what the two-party US political process, now corrupted to the core by Citizens United, can ever accomplish.
People who supported djt "because he'll do something different" failed to grasp that 'different' has never entailed 'better'.
2
Hi Bunnita - the change happened under the Reagan administration, which did away with The Fairness Doctrine in broadcasting. Fair? Balanced? Is that true of right wing media?
2
while its hard to find an intellectual reason for supporting a conman for president, these are the same people to give money to grifting televangelists, patronized trumps tacky casinos, and watched his vile tv show. they are the inheritors of the nation. they are future.
32
So after a year of trashing Trump voters, the NY Times pats itself on the back for ONE column of pro Trump voters! I think the Times should follow this easy rule- whatever the polls show as Trump's approval rating, that should be the percentage of pro Trump letters each week. About 35% at this point. I happen to be someone who has never voted Repub in my life and is a progressive, but I must say this constant re-hashing of the evils of Trump in the media has recently worn on me more than his policies, themselves. And secondly, anyone who quotes the genius Taleb Nissan in any column, no matter what their political persuasion, is alright by me.
10
The key problem here is that major American newspapers KEEP doing all these "let's find out what Trump voters are thinking"-- usually by visiting yet another diner-- style stories to the point they've become a national joke, but then never seem to have that energy in visiting other groups of American citizens in the same way, particularly minorities. The NYT can't act like this opinion page idea turning things over to Trump supporters is some kind of unique experiment-- again and again in the last year journalists have returned to that same trough like they're on some kind of mystical safari. And none of the arguments made by those opinion page Trump supporters today are things that make us go "oh, gosh, is that what they think, gee, I never realized...." We've heard all this again and again and again.
If the NYT wants to do something really unique-- and fair in light of today's experiment-- then in a week or so, similarly turn over a section of the opinion page entirely to a marginalized group (like immigrants) and after that, try sending your journalists out in the field to one of the many American diners, bars, or eating places where people other than straight white Trump supporters congregate, and let's hear as lengthily and directly from them for a change.
80
Yes. You too might be surprised. It is a huge diverse country.
They don't all agree with Trump. They also don't all agree with you. There are a lot of other opinions about a lot of other things.
4
Peycos,
You said this much more eloquently and succinctly than I did in my attempt to make this very point. Thx
Sorry, you're wrong. Just recently read an article about how black women voters thought about the Alabama election. Many articles about how women or other groups feel about Trump. Besides, I don't know any Trump voters (a least who have talked to me since the election) whereas I live in an entire community of Hillary voters, so getting their opinions is not difficult.
While I don't agree with Trump voters and truly believe they don't have a clue as to what they support or why, I enjoyed reading their letters. It made me understand how clueless of an electorate we have here in America. I would love to sit with them and ask questions to expand upon what they believe. I honestly don't think they could articulate some of the things they claim to believe about Trump and the Republican party. In my mind they hear the talking points on Fox News and run with them. Don't get me wrong, plenty of those on the left do the same thing after watching MSNBC, but this was a story about Trumpkins.
15
I like this editorial decision and find the letters informative. I don't agree with them much, but it helps me better understand Trump supporters' points of view and how to have a conversation that truly tries to connect. It also restores my confidence in the NYT a bit. It has become an overtly biased newspaper in tone and decisions about story lines. I came of age with this newspaper in the 1970s and loved its hard, critical, far more neutral journalism. Sometimes I find today's reporting painful to read because there isn't even a pretense of objectivity. These letters aren't about false equivalence. The paper is actually doing its job. Readers who only want a liberal echo chamber can get that on social media. Let's support and continue to have higher expectations for one of our country's leading newspapers of record.
17
I cannot agree with you more! I recently saw the film "The Post" about the courageous decision to publish the Pentagon Papers. It truly made me wistful for that time when journalists really were professionals and not just a wing of one political party or another.
1
Maybe this exercise was useful for people who live in bright blue areas on the map. For those of us who live in the real Mayberry and put up with this uninformed nonsense (and worse) all the time, it was far from enlightening.
36
The Times is to be commended for publishing this. Half of America voted for Trump ( I did not). Too many Times readers characterize Trump voters as nothing but racist dunderheads. This is not helpful- it makes it too easy to refuse to hear any opinion that you disagree with, too easy to make it impossible to compromise on anything whatsoever, too easy to descend to name calling and apocalyptic rhetoric, and, crucially, too easy to feel nothing but hatred and contempt for your fellow Americans. We need more dialog, and less fanaticism on both sides.
17
"Half of America" did not vote for Trump. Half of America didn't even bother to vote.
As much as I do see the need to hear from the 'other side', I do have to agree with the writer who wrote "Dear New York Times, Please don’t ever do that again." There are obviously a few educated people who are still trump supporters but remember, there are educated racists out there too, jeff sessions being a prime example.
21
Interesting that the supposedly lefty NY Times engaged in this exercise, but there has not been (to my knowledge) a similar exercise engaged in by Breitbart, Fox News, National Review or any of the other rightwing media outlets. I admit, that may be my own ignorance because I only rarely look for information from those media outlets. However, if my knowledge is accurate, then I think it speaks to the bigger problem at play here: that the search for understanding and engagement with the other side has been almost entirely unilateral. If that's the case, then this is more of a vanity exercise because one side thinks they're playing poker and the other side thinks they're playing solitaire.
23
"Well, Fox News and Brietbart do it." Or don't, depending on how you phrase the example.
Is that a good way to judge behavior?
Is that a good way to come back from an ugly loss and win big instead? Are they your models of political wisdom?
Exactly.
"Why do you keep asking questions of Trump voters? Who cares what they think? The Trump administration has been a complete failure and the world knows it, yet you insist on talking to people who, no matter what, think that President Trump is the messiah!" ---exactly (Thank you Mr Kline of Austin, TX). This goes to all those hundreds of trump supporting focus groups showing up on news networks, like CBS. You ALL should know better. We don't care what they think & we're sick of them. And while we're at it, quit normalizing trump. You're not helping.
28
Full credit to the Times for publishing the views of Trump supporters.
Will Fox News now air the views of anti-Trump voters?
Getting people out of their echo chambers has to start somewhere.
23
I briefly started reading and then stopped. No, no, no to gross ignorance and mendacity. They aren't worth my time.
31
It's a good idea to print the letters. I'm sure if I read enough of them I'll find some really 'fine' people.
8
It is one thing to not agree with Trump policies and even not like his Twitter messages and at times his vulgar language. It is another to disparage fellow Americans because their political preferences may be different from yours. It is a cancer, I'm afraid, that eating at the American left and ultimately will do more harm than good not only for their politics, but for America as a whole.
13
I think it may not all be disparaging because of political views. It may be disparaging people because of their blindness to dishonesty, blindness to lack of respect, and blindness to attacks on institutions like checks and balances, and the free press which are fundamentals of this country's values.
Also they may be disparaging people's inability to understand the con by the man who actually told them up front he would financially profit from the campaign. He is profiting financially big time from the presidency, and continues to distract people from reality with tweets.
2
Their "political preferences" involve either overlooking or actively approving of a man who is openly racist; who refers to Nazis as "very fine people"; who insults an entire continent; who wants to bar brown- and black-skinned immigrants; who refuses to denounce whites supremacists and fascists; and so on ad nauseam. To vote for Trump required being willing, at the very least, to overlook his overt and disgusting racism (and misogyny, but I won't take the space here to discuss that). Do I want to "reach out" to anyone who was willing to do that, to overlook those things in voting for him? No. Do I want to "understand" them? No. This is no longer a matter of different "political preferences" among people of good will on both sides. This is open enmity. I look at Trump supporters precisely as I look at fascists and their enablers in any time or any place. My father fought to defeat them in WWII. I will not "reach out" to them now just because they are American citizens. They are not my fellows. They are my enemies.
Like it or not, Trump supporters are our friends, neighbors and co-workers. They are most straight white males and about half of straight white females. They are typically the wealthiest men and women in our communities. About the only groups you can find that uniformly oppose him are black women, gays and lesbians, and black men in that order.
If I were a Republican I'd be very, very happy - which is why Trump's erstwhile Republican detractors in congress have lately become so ingratiating. The man has really delivered for his partisan base in a way no President has done since LBJ. I might not like all the crass juvenalia, but I'd vote to re-elect him.
The letters reflect the sentiments of half the electorate. Instead of being offended by their publication, it would be a better use of time for liberals to give some thought as to why so many Americans have embraced such reactionary extremes. Instead, liberals seem to be content attributing it to the conventional banalities of changing demographics and "patriarchy" and trusting that #metoo will somehow turn the tide. In other words, the same old Democratic song-and-dance.
Trump offers something tangible - vile maybe - but a hecka-alot more compelling than the poll tested, focus group branded slogans typical of the Democrats.
13
" Good Germans " all of them. Looking the other way in order to identify with the strongman thus feeling strong themselves. Not a racist among them, just " good Americans" willing to follow their leader into a national nightmare. Reminds me of the supporters of Bush 2 and his war who only woke up when the very predictable disaster occurred. I'm sure they were among those folks.
47
Is it so hard to print these opinions alongside bulleted FACTS? ie. Trump helped economy. Bullet , NO HE DIDN"T do anything so far to increase our economy..
BBC runs these kinds of columns EVERY DAY..
19
Grace, this is a fantastic idea. I would love to see an independent fact checker alongside the letters. I'm sure it would be interpreted as an attack and another example of bias, however.
2
I commend you for giving space to Trump's supporters' letters. Those of us that listen to others, no matter how much we disagree with them, already were aware of these views. Everyone that disagrees with Trump's supporters should be fully aware that they exist, and remember that action must be taken to ensure that Trump does not continue to hurt our country: VOTE!
6
I live with these folks. No matter how many Rush talking points they mouth this all about hating “others”.
In fairness the hate comes from allowing the financialization of our economy which never grows GDP and puts wealth in the top 10% to the exclusion of everyone else. Despite the fact our economy is driven by 70% consumer spending.
Trump, cons & GOP will never ever focus on the bottom 90% and the sooner these folks realize that the sooner we can fix our economy.
19
Sorry, but I did not see anything informative in the comments of Trump supporters. They seem not to be following what is actually happening, commenting on progress under Donald that seems drawn from the campaign promises. I did not see thoughtful defense of what he is doing, mostly partisan misinformation. I guess it is interesting to see how some segment of our society can be completely immune to what is going on day to day, but I think the message should be that those people are the lunatic fringe and deserve to be ignored as they always have been.
20
What a pity more Americans haven't developed the healthy scepticism about reports of events and politicians statements that many citizens of the former Ussr developed in reaction to their leaders lies and misinformation (which in this case was faithfully reported by State Media).
They of course had excuses that US citizens don't! The latter need to make far less effort to check facts and assess things according to those and their own experiences and aren't facing the same dire consequences should they dissent.
2
A good effort - we must continue to speak to each other. But, reading some of the letters, I can't help thinking that we need to really work on education in the U.S. People have no critical thinking skills, don't seem to have much basic knowledge of history, geography, economics, And we certainly don't know how to discuss politics.
11
I am no fan of Trump - I think he is unfit to be president & worry about our country with him at the helm.
Having said that I found these comments wonderful for two reasons
1) They showed me criteria others are using to judge Trump. Perhaps there are achievements I did not consider, qualities invisible . IT will allow me to have a civil and informed discussion with such folks
2) More importantly, these comments were from actual American. So much of social media is composed of folks pretending to be American. These social media trolls are intent upon fomenting fear and division.
So thank you very much NY Times!!!
8
The most alienating political moment of my life was during Obama's second victory speech, when he said "Even if you didn't vote for me, you know I fight for you!" No, Barack, no you absolutely never did.
I live and work in brownstone Brooklyn and the casual "let's all march and commiserate because this is the worst thing ever" is something that makes me envious. Imagine being able to just walk around saying what you feel and being told you're a "Hero" for it, that you are the embodiment of civi pride.
The hatred, putdowns, and scorn in these responses to these letters only hardens the resolve. It assails not the truths I've learned living here, how the DNC is a house of lies. That Trump told the truth about that is why I voted for him. Glad I did, too.
8
John, President Obama was not being literal when he said that. He probably did not even know you, I'm guessing, so he was not addressing you personally. He didn't do anything for ME, either, in that sense. I understood that he was speaking to the country collectively. So I was not angry when he didn't anything for me personally.
2
The DNC may have told a few lies. Trump has told thousands. If you can't appreciate the difference, that's on you.
2
What was so troubling about the Trump supporters' letters was their almost united focus on temporality - they championed getting something now (lower taxes, fewer regulations, tough talk with our enemies as well as our international friends). But humanity is facing a crisis with climate change yet these folks mysteriously think no such thing, despite overwhelming evidence. They refuse to think through what regulations have given us: a decade more years to live, even when opioid problems are backed out of avg. lifespan numbers since 1960. That is a result of cleaner water, cleaner air, carefully monitored foods, no pesticides...can they not put these things together with life saving regulations since 1960? Have they not read "A Silent Spring"? This administration would deny science, claim that regulations hurt us (want DDT back in your lives, or Thalidomide?) and want tax cuts (which with the huge, huge deficits that will destroy the future of their children) all now. Forget about the indecency of this man, his obscene remarks and behavior toward people of color, of faith, of women. His childish and foolish behavior toward the international community - our allies - and his out and out lies. He is a one man band of fake news and yet these people with their utter lack of humanity towards mankind buy all the lies because, it seems, they will get a bigger paycheck (they think) tomorrow. But our kids? Our world? Our water and air and food?
376
So well said. Thank you.
Don't forget regulations in manufacturing protecting workers, Judith. My father died young from inhaling metal fragments in a silverware factory for forty-five years.
2
To Judith:
Thank you for your comment. You have mentioned so many serious issues we face with this current president and his behavior and administration.
The only thing that came to to me as an "add on" is: what kind of example does he present to our children? If it is okay for the president to lie, embellish, bully, and show little interest in addressing the myriad of problems we face, in addition to his use of language? What example is he setting for our young people about how a responsible adult behaves, and how a president should put the needs of the country first? Looking at the behavior issues of his own children, I fear for the nation.
3
The second largest religious sect in this country, after consolidating all Christian denominations, is climate changers, formerly known as global warmers. The world is not black or white. A little nuance would help. Yes, some regulations help, others hurt. It's why conservatives favor cost benefit analysis over strict ideology. How did Obama making the world a less safe place by blessing Iran's nuclear plans, benefit our children and our grandchildren? How did Obama shipping Iran tons of cash to be used by the Iranian Revolutionary Guard to spread terror throughout the world make the world safer for our children? It's time to take the ideological blinders off.
1
The letters from Trump supporters show that not all who stand by their votes for him and delusional, defensive, self-interested people who express themselves poorly and don't care about the U.S.'s standing in the world.
It shows that some of them are delusional, defensive, self-interested people who don't care about the U.S.'s standing in the world that can express themselves clearly. That's about it.
18
The Times should of course present such views, in the interest of informing its readers. It is not the Times' role to avoid offering views which are upsetting to most of its readers. (I think Trump's presidency is a bad joke, but I don't want to be insulated from those who believe otherwise.)
5
Are Republicans begging Fox and Breitbart to present differing views?
1
What I found most depressing about these letters was the lack of fact-based reasoning behind their support for Trump in favor of the Fox News version of distorted reality. Dictators around the world are not quaking in their boots now, compared to during Obama's presidency. In fact, they are emboldened by the inconsistency and sheer incompetence of Trump. We did not exit "poor" international agreements. By leaving the Paris accords, the US is weakening efforts to reduce the impact of climate change. Leaving TPP has reduced our influence in the Pacific and increased China's. Opinions of the US have plummeted around the world. These are facts, not the brayings of Hannity, Limbaugh and Trump on which most of your letter writers seem to rely. I found reading those letters to be profoundly demoralizing as they bespeak a disconnection from the realm of fact, science and verifiable data among Trump supporters.
36
Props to NYT for asking to hear from Trump voters. How sad some readers still call us "deplorable" and one said to never do this again (ask us). Where is all the "love Trumps hate" from the left?
Sadly, the anti-Trump half of the country doesn't realize that the other half felt for 8 years (09-16) just as they do now. Trump is fixing all that we believe Obama messed up during that time.
The rising economic tide raises all ships - as evidenced by the record low unemployment for blacks - but proportionately so. Our free enterprise system rewards those who risk to own businesses and become successful. It it preposterous for anyone to think that a tax cut will or should make the working class as prosperous as the upper class.
I cringe at some Trump tweets, just as I cringe when mainstream media paints him 95% negative. Common sense, discerning adults can see the results of a President's policies without being told how to view them.
8
President Obama deserves the credit for our healthy economy. What damage did he do? Did he diminish the US on the international stage? Did he make people who depend on the Affordable Care Act fear for their lives?
I'll tell you one thing President Obama didn't do. He didn't make the ugly underbelly of America so clearly visible to the rest of the world. Trump has shifted the rock so that everyone can see what's wriggling beneath it. We need to face this.
1
Oh this is bad that people are upset. It is very good to hear from these folks, even though I don't agree with a word they say or a thought they have. Don't want no silo. Thanks for publishing this, and keep going.
2
Publishing letters of Trump's supporters is a testament to the strength and integrity of the Times. I don't subscribe to read what I agree with--I want the truth,ideas, and intellectual discourse on my screen. If I want right-wing propoganda, there is always Breitbart. For left-wing doxy, there is MSNBC or the occasional cringe-worthy piece on National Public Radio. With respect to the opinions of the Trump supporters themselves, they have legitimacy, even if I don't agree with it. Thank you for running this piece, Times.
9
Fine, but I doubt there is much to be gained. Trump fans see him as rude and brash but nothing more serious. For what it's worth, I have much greater respect for my fellow citizens, including the Trump voters, than I do for Trump himself.
3
I for one was even more opposed to Trump than I was two Hillary, whom taken together represent two of the most problematic choices we've ever had among the major parties for the highest office in your land. Just as I for one applaud your forum for Trump aficionados. The shrillness of the opposition frightens me -- what's wrong with considering (and on a regular basis at that) opposing and alternative views? In a democracy, there should be nothing wrong with it, and everything right with it, but the pervasively rigid intolerance to views counter to one's own not only is anathema to a democratic society, but could bring down its curtain over the longer haul.
7
The real issue with the letters the Times picked is that they didn't provide any insight outside of the notion that Trump's remaining fans are living in an alternate reality where he's an energetic, successful President who Gets Things Done.
What would have been far, far more interesting is if they'd found someone with a realistic view of what Trump has actually been up to and who agrees with it.
14
There are a number of common threads to these published comments by Trump supporters. Most dramatic is the prevalence of false, or imaginary, causality. Nearly all the letters attribute 2017's economic and employment gains to Trump's policies, while ignoring the momentum effects of fourteen straight quarters of GDP growth and eight years' steady decline in unemployment (from a high of 9.9% in late 2010 to 4.7% in Obama's last month in office). There seems to be no appreciation for the time lag that accompanies any economic stimulus or tax program. Another thread is the substitution of nationalistic bombast for forceful, coherent foreign and immigration policies. Trump played these cards--false causality and self-aggrandizing bombast--with terrible effectiveness in the 2016 campaign and his first year in office. Based on these letters, I fear his supporters will continue to be susceptible to his demagogic sway.
35
What struck me about the Trump supporters' letters is how the writers liked what is happening in the economy, and the feeling that ISIS has been defeated, and they attribute these stated successes to Trump. Why credit Trump? Economic results take time to maturate so the seeds of the recent economic results were most likely sown earlier than the Trump presidency (the economy continued to improve throughout Obama's time in the White House), so one should not be too quick to attribute them to Trump or the recent tax cut. Time will tell if his actions and tax cut are beneficial. Secondly, the slow defeat, if that is what it is, of ISIS was many years in the making and it certainly is not solely attributable to any actions taken in the last twelve months. So while Trump's actions may bring success in the future, although I doubt that, I think its far too early to declare Trump's first year a success.
12
Trump didn't do it.
He also didn't prevent it.
He meandered, giving in too much to too many things that were being done wrong before, like Syria and Libya and never-ending Afghan fighting. He'd said sometimes he'd stop that. He hasn't. Then again, his opponents said they'd do more of it, and at least they haven't.
He didn't make the sky fall, Chicken Littles out there. A winning opposition needs something more than imminent disaster because The Unthinkable threatens.
Reading these letters makes me feel hopeless. I find it difficult to understand why or how anyone could support this president & administration. I was a Republican for many years. I am now am Independent. The question is really about divisiveness. Anyone who has lived in this country for the past year has experienced the divisiveness & hatred in some way. I lay that blame at the feet of Trump & his campaign. It has only gone down hill from there. The door has been opened to allow a lack of respect for people who may not be like us through race, religion or culture. Lying is acceptable, bragging is encouraged, cheating on your partner is normalized. Where have our values as a society gone. Most of these letters mentioned the economy, or the military or some personal benefit to having Trump for president. All I can see is the way our country & it's very fiber are falling apart while our children stand by & witness it. Every day I worry about the future for my grandchildren. I worry that our environment will be harmed beyond saving, that the Koch Brothers & the Mercers will succeed in buying themselves a government, that North Korea may be insulted one too many times. But I also worry about the generations coming behind us & the lessons they are learning about being decent human beings in this chaotic hateful time in history. The floodgates have been opened by this president. It's going to be very difficult to close them.
34
It's refreshing to see a diversity of opinions in the same place. I always thought that's what diversity/ multi-culturalism was about... people of different backgrounds seeing the world differently who each see different obstacles in achieving their American dream.
Monocultures yelling at each other simply means we've all closed out minds.
The experts have not been right... in looking back at the misses on predictions despite the claims of apocalypse over the past years, I still wonder how little damage would have actually happened to non-bankers/ elites without the massive bailouts
4
I am stunned when the Trump supporters keep referring to President Obama as a "failed President" In his eight years the Dow increased by 250% and the unemployment rate halved. Within five years of his Presidency the Market was back to its pre recession high. In the Great Depression it took the market over twenty three years to recover its 1929 high. He set in motion the policies that would help defeat ISIS and of course we got rid of Bin Laden on his watch. I hope that all our Presidents are such "failures".
43
Obama is a fine man, who did a pretty good job overall. It's been done a lot worse.
Where he stumbled, it was by listening too much to the right wing of his own party, the very people he defeated. It was by doing regime change wars in Syria and Libya as examples, which were pure Hillary moves.
So what did we get to vote for next? It wasn't more of Obama who defeated Hillary on exactly those points, it was all the worst and failed parts of an otherwise rather good Presidency.
Recoiling against opposing points of view no matter how poor (e.g. flat earth) is never the correct answer in a free society. To do so is to distrust the listener.
False equivalency is only valid if we are unable to understand the issue.
The Times does well to present the issue and all the surrounding perspectives. We do well when we can consider all points of view including the less informed and come to a rational conclusion, or better yet an understanding.
4
I don't know what this achieved. We are all aware of the talking points from Trump supporters. What would be interesting is what they think if they are informed of facts, eg, Carrier plant firings, ISIS strategy unchanged from the previous administration, ACA = Obamacare, that the stock market in the US is =< the markets in the rest of the world (ie, not performing out of expectations).etc. Ask how the negatives are acceptable - how is it ok that the world is laughing, that Erdogan "protectors" were allowed to beat up Americans protesting in DC, etc, etc. Not just a shrug and dismissed but an introspective discussion of how they can support the totality of this presidency. How do the negatives not outweigh the positives. Thinking. Analysis. Not simple opinions because he talks the same as they do.
21
This comment sums it up for me: "My question for them: Did you ever consider the impact of Mr. Trump’s policies on others’ lives?" I am doing well, thank you. It's others that I worry about.
6
The things that Trump voters give Trump credit for are not necessarily good things overall.
Through out history, conservatism has failed where ever it was tried. It has only survived at the barrel of a gun. No nation on earth has ever been constituted along conservative principles, so the claim that appointing conservative judges is not something in any nation's interest.
We have not yet experienced the damage that will be done by the rolling back of regulations, which we know will be devastating and cost far more to fix. Remember "superfund" sites"?
Keeping North Korea in line? How? Under Trump that country has moved faster and further in its testing of global weapons and is a far cry away from the padlocked and monitored reactors of the Clinton era.
The biggest laugh when it comes to describing Trump achievements is that he destroyed ISIS. ISIS is still in Syria and Libya and is making major inroads in Africa.
Progress is change in a positive direction. Trump said he wanted to shake things up in DC, but that is a means, not an end.
18
I read with interest your letters about the letters from Trump supporters, published January 18. First, I commend the paper for publishing the Trump supporter letters. I thought it would be a valuable teaching aid for the non-believers to see. Seems to me that, while acknowledging that the supporters are well intentioned and serious, most of your readers still dismiss them as uninformed, close-minded and simply unable to understand the truth about things. Respectfully, i would maintain that the opposite is true!
16
No matter how enlightened one may seem to be, nor how strongly believe that policies endorsed by Mr. Trump are correct, to fail to see how corrosive Trump behavior is to democratic norms is unacceptable. The maxim "the means do not justify the end" was never more true than in this case. His use of the office for enrichment of him and his family, his disrespect for all opposition, his constant lying even about his lying is unprecedented. Support for such a poor human specimen is deplorable, just as much as support for monsters like Stalin, Mao, Hitler, Mussolini, Mugabe is deplorable. I simply cannot sympathize with any one who is willfully blind to behavior and sentiments they would not tolerate among their acquaintances.
2
Good move by the New York Times. Let the three sides have a "Go" at it. But, let's also remember that the history is written in the pages of the Courts, the records of all Federal Agencies involved, Trump's Tweets, the actual recordings of what he, Trump, spoke and the news papers here, Asia and Europe that have reported on the Trump events and actions.
When we have news reports from across our country and Europe and Asia that report the same things and draw the same conclusions, it can not be a false report. It can not be fake news. It can not be alt-facts. Why? Because no one is rich enough to bribe every last news organizations to make up the same story and conclusions. And news organizations have high standards of conduct which they have upheld. All it can be Trump hostility at the accurate reports of his mis-steps and false claims.
8
As a teenager I lived under Fidel Castro in Cuba and as a medical student I lived under Franco in Spain . Those experiences taught me not to underestimate the tendency of people towards irrationality . In both countries there were huge amounts of people ready to praise the dictator in power . Most people were ashamed and outraged at their own Government . But in both countries there was a segment of the population that approved of any outrage . Actually they felt empowered by those outrages . Trump does not have the power that those 2 tyrants had . He is just an aspiring autocrat and does not seems very successful at his effort to undermine our Democracy . But when I look at his base I find something familiar .
44
That is an interesting comparison, Trump to Castro. It has more in it than friends of either would like to see, which makes it even more fun.
3
The imagined benefits Trump supporters claim are either non-existent, wholly unrelated to anything Trump has done or attributable to unleashing business to run rampant and unregulated in the short term with costs that will clearly become obvious in the long term. What is do deplorable about Trumpers is that they felt so little about what is good in America that they were willing to do the equivalent of walking into a casino and betting the entire country at the worst odds at the roulette table.
18
I’m not sure there is much value in these letters “Trump Voters, One Year In” and two letters from individuals that now have a different opinion. There have been sufficient articles written by those supporting Trump, and of course many others opposing his policies and demeanor. But their just a handful and one gets the impression most that continue to support him today will not change. And vice versa.
Develop some trends on how many voted Democrat in 2016, and now support Trump, and how many supported Republicans but would switch to Democrats in the November, 2018 and you’re on to something.
73
I completely support this exercise and applaud the NYT for doing it. A true democracy incorporates the voices of everyone.
I would love more op-eds from the right. I really want to hear them explain their positions rather than have people rendering their interpretation of the actions.
6
Conservative punditry tend to write about Liberals, (mis)characterizing them as straw men.
Liberal punditry too often does the same back at them.
Neither lately has a any real focus on positive policies for their own, and good arguments supporting those. It is done, but not on these pages.
When it is done, those I've read are done better by liberals. But those liberals are proposing things that go much too far left for Democratic politicians seeking donor money.
Instead, we get from Democrats things like Maryland Democratic Senator Cardin's neocon/hawk "report" just issued as demand for more military spending, confrontation, and war everywhere. Their "support" amounts to bashing the other guy.
I'd like to see this as a regular weekly feature; Trump supporters' realities will become more familiar to Trump resisters; also, I'd love to see if people change their minds -- and are willing to say so -- down the road.
1
I would like some help in communicating with Trump supporters and engaging in constructive dialogue. I am hearing more and more incidences of families breaking up because of the passionate disagreements they have with one another.
6
"Incidents", please. But seriously, is that really happening? It's terrible!
2
Yeah, You got me on my flawed spelling. It is happening to families, neighbors and friends.I could not continue to read the letters from the Trump supporters because of the distortions, lies, and factual errors. I am serious about the need for effective dialogue. Reading some of the commentary on this article has already provided it.
2
You have to know your enemy before you can know how to oppose him. The Nazis knew this, that ie why they held book burnings.
The tRump fans need to be hears so we know what their ideology is, why they believe what they do. Most of them will not change their thinking, it is like an alcoholic, they wil continue to believe as they do until it destroys them, and will blame it on the opposition, these are those "deplorables" that HRC referred to, and it stung, their self esteem was at risk, their arguments are specious and fallacious, but they do not have the mental capacity to understand this.
They applaud him for the embassy move to Jerusalem, bringing more hatred from the Arabic nations. They believe he is responsible for the Stock market rise, they know nothing about it. The like the end of regulations formulated over many years to protect them, the believe the tax cuts will speed up the economy, highly doubtful at best. They like tough talk, think it brings security, try that with the Cosa Nostra.
Believe religion should supersede science, putting belief before knowledge. This forum gives us l the opportunity to see just what kind of mentality supports a documented liar and swindler, they are the rubes that pay to see the carnival sideshows, and believe conspiracy theories.
They will always be with us, they need each other to keep themselves from knowing reality, low self esteem, the real world defeats them.
26
The fact that you consider other Americans who happen to disagree with you "the enemy" is sad and says a lot about the unfortunate state of the country.
5
@me
I tried to think of a more acceptable term, but none of them fit in this case. they are not just opponents, they are aiding and abetting in the destruction of the Republic. They are not just misinformed or mistaken, they have adopted an ideology that is immoral, even vicious, it is Fascist in nature, yes the are an enemy, an enemy of free people everywhere.
13
@me
This is not just a disagreement, it i a clash of right and wrong, these supporters are disputing the facts, they are making excuses for abominable behavior, telling us a swindler, liar, is a good man because of some perceived action, the he is a Christian despite behaving more as a Goth.
They believe the words and actions of a sociopath as being for the good of the country, despite evidence that he is the enemy of it. From my point of the world about me, thieves, swindlers, cons are the enemy, as are white power people, bigots, and other would be petty dictators. They are not welcome in my world, learn the difference between disagreement and opposition to the enemy.
13
The consistent themes in the pro-Trump letters were these:
“Trump deserves but isn’t getting credit for fixing the economy, the rising stock market, defeating ISIS, filling judicial vacancies.”
“Yes, he’s not nice, a bully, unpleasant. But we don’t care. In fact, his bad manners and boorish behavior have probably been assets.”
“He’s succeeding where Obama failed.”
“The more the media “attacks” him, the more we like him.”
This is the sound of the Trump base expressing itself—a constituency that is immune to facts, logic, and an understanding of history. In fact, they view such things as the trappings of elitism. They go with their gut, and so does he.
That’s why we’re in this mess.
442
They also seem totally ok with looting the country which I will never understand.
29
@Michelle Teas: So true. Note that I mentioned a dearth of logic within the base.
BTW, I think it’s great that the Times published these letters. There’s no downside. It’s not like his supporters are converting anyone. Neither is he.
10
The question is whether the Times advances false equivalence by publishing such letters.
As long as the letters are from paying subscribers, it seems that not just pro-Trump views should be presented, but that the same emphasis will be given other political positions regarding ALL types of politics and even pseudo-politics :)
The question is whether the letters/comments are from paying subscribers, AND what these same folks will be saying when the stock market plunges, or, or, or, etc.
We'll look forward to seeing more forums for other political persuasions giving equal time to letters supporting the whole spectrum of other politics the 'Editorial Board' is accused of not favoring, as well as hearing from these very same folks again in 2019 at this time, and the year after, and in 2021, regarding the performance of His Unhinged Unraveling Unfitness.
If Pandora's Box gets cracked open, it's fairly impossible to shut again.
50
I am unclear on the relevance of being a paid subscriber as it relates to hearing the views of our citizens. A newspaper should present news and views across the spectrum. I would assume that the majority of Times/real news subscribers do not agree with these folks. Shold we just stay in our bubble and not be accurately informed? Like, say, Fox News? I prefer to know the truth of what's out there, as much as I dislike it.
7
Why do you suggest that the NYT's only publish letters from paying subscribers? The NYT's is an influential newspaper on a national scale.
I would like to hear the opinions of those who think they do not wish to support a publication that they generally do not agree with.
If you never hear their voices, you don't know what they are thinking or why.
What came across for me reading those responses was the general lack of historical perspective on political life in their own country. Most seemed to have been completely divorced from anything that has come before, making their comparisons seem very shallow indeed.
10
Yeah, paying customers and not robots or trolls. Some of the responses did not make sense to me but were grammatically acceptable.
3
I also appreciate the Times acknowledging the viewpoints of Trump voters, because I believe it is important to listen to the other side, even if we don't agree with it (in fact, I check Fox News every couple of days just to see if important stories are on their front page as they are of other news sites - they aren't). It is striking how much credit they give to Trump certain outcomes that cannot possibly be entirely his doing. They credit the strong economy: do any of them realize the economy was in recovery, and in fact humming along, last January when Trump took office? Sure, the promise of lower taxes and fewer regulations fed the economic flames, but Trump did not single-handedly revive the economy. They also note the defeat of ISIS: Trump alone did not defeat ISIS. Some military spending and influence may have increased under his regime, but we must acknowledge that ISIS has been in decline for over a year, and we are not the only military in the area that has been fighting. (Also, hasn't the American public protested deploying more ground troops, fearing another Iraq-Afghanistan situation?) There are numerous other compliments Trump voters have for him while barely acknowledging the negative impact he has had on the country and the world. These negative impacts can and must be covered by media outlets for our democracy to function. Thank you, Times, for acknowledging the other side even if most of your readers, including myself, do not agree with them.
135
Thanks for observing that there are other nations involved in the fight against ISIS. The Australian Air Force has been part of the bombing in Syria - for three years.
https://www.aph.gov.au/About_Parliament/Parliamentary_Departments/Parlia... and http://www.defence.gov.au/Operations/Okra/default.asp
10
It is not a matter of agreement but whether their opinions are based on misinformation and willful ignorance. There are too many outlets for unchallenged propaganda.
6
Maybe I'm just more curious than a lot of people.
But millions chose Trump over Clinton--enough so he won the electoral college and is now President.
And I'm curious why. I don't think it's the job of the NYT to only print things I agree with. In fact, I go out of my way to read things I don't agree with.
I like to think it makes me informed--not just as a voter, but as a citizen of the US.
127
I agree that we should listen to the viewpoints of essentially 1/2 the electorate in our paper of record, but part of participating in the exchange of ideas here is accepting facts. So these are the numbers of votes for the two candidates in 2016.
Clinton: 65,853,516
Trump: 62,984,824
In 13 swing states the difference favoring Trump was less than 800,000 voters, so much less than "millions" which you note. The margins of victory which handed the final few blue states to Trump were so negligible that it calls the entire institution of the Electoral College into question.
202
I appreciate you stating that. I have never heard anyone who is not a supporter of our president actually complain about only being fed information that is agreed upon. I, as you, try very much to take in both sides of the issues, and after seeing the research that 90% of what the main stream media is reporting, is negative towards President Trump, I became very curious. It made me wonder why no one on the left felt like they were being, in a way, manipulated.
I agree with you about not wanting to only read things I agree with, but there were actually about 3 million more votes for Clinton over Trump and he only won because of an outdated system that doesn't allow for the majority to rule in certain instances.
14
It's definitely worth it to sometimes put yourself in someone else's shoes, and really try to see where they're coming from. I do sympathize with those Trump supporters who see him as an answer to some problem. However, reading their letters, it seems that many of them are basing their opinion on incorrect information. For example, one man cited Trump's pulling the military out of conflicts it doesn't need to be in (that would be great) -- however, the news yesterday was full of info on how the wars and conflicts we're involved in have actually continued and increased under Trump.
It really matters what your news sources are -- I don't think Americans are all that different from each other, but depending where you get your news can make a huge difference in world view.
278
Does it concern you that 90% of the news coming out of the mainstream media is negative towards Trump? No false reporting there Im sure. Your concern about where you get your news is valid, but you have to admit the mainstream media is in the tank for this president and just the way they articulate an issue is persuasive. If I were democrat I would be very leary of whats being pushed upon me by the media currently. Again, the research is showing the media is manipulating the masses to hate our current leadership. Thats indisputable.
4
If I were a republican I'd be very, very leary about what is pushed out there by the Trump administration.. On Nov.14, 2017 the Washington Post wrote that Trump had 1628 false or misleading claims, and on January 10,2018 according to Esquire he had hit 2000 lies.
12
After New Year I drove 500 miles from upstate NY to Chicago through the great red states of Pennsylvania, Ohio, and Indiana without Sirius radio. On neither the FM nor the AM dial could I find find one news radio station that could even be considered "liberal," besides NPR. There were, however, many many conservative religious stations and many many stations broadcasting simultaneously Rush Limbaugh and his clones. So don't cry too many tears for poor Donnie and the print media. Broadcast media is monopolized by the right wing conservatives and, to use your words, "manipulating the masses to hate."
6
While I disagree with the Trump supporters I think that their opinions deserve to be seen and read and yes, treated with respect. What I have not liked about the GOP is their lack of respect for people whose opinions and ideas differ from theirs. What this exercise illustrated was how divisive our politicians have been. It's like watching a schoolyard spat where both sides are engaged in screaming at each other at the top of their lungs saying something like "YOU DID IT NOT ME!!!" and ignoring the consequences. I'd like to see that change. However, given what our current situation is I don't think it will. It's easier to attack or accuse or simply not listen or refuse to accept any solution that doesn't conform to what one's politics are and then go to the nearest computer and rant on social media.
46