Why They Hate Government

The Trump era brought in the first president that represents the libertarian voters. (Though Reagan certainly started it.) All the talk of ”too much regulation” is aimed at these haters of the ”nanny state.”

The so called white working class has come to respect authority, people you meet face to face. Government leaders to them are just doing ”useless unproductive work.”

We have not come that far from our hunter gatherer days. In those times there were small tribes. There was a pecking order among the males, whereas experience probably ranked the women from leader to follower and novice. The elders were needed in things like childbirth. The men had to adjust to their role in the tribe. There may have been a leader you had to submit to, but the rest of the men of your generation were of equal standing. Some took roles as specialist: tool maker, shaman. If you had no special skills, strength mattered.

In today’s world all that breaks down. You take orders from your boss. Your community has leaders you may know somewhat. You vote based on how you want local taxes spent. Above that level things become less meaningful for the average person.

The concept of a national government in a country of 300 million leads to distrust of this government far away. All interactions with no personal touch are alien to our tribal heritage.

The libertarian is angered by dealing with faceless bureaucrats at any level. He starts thinking everything can be handled by the private sector, supply and demand!

In today’s high tech world the private sector gets doctors, engineers and scientists trained by partly tax money. There is no going back. even the science and technology is pushed ahead by government involvement. Either as basic research of funding. 

There are of course people that know full well how all this works, but in public express the same views as Trump voters. They are able to personally profit from things the government does. (An example of this is weather forecasting, Accuweather as a business).

Me too election

Nebraska has a woman, Jane Raybould, running for the US SENATE against another woman, a would be rancher who is actually a previous resident of the same city, Lincoln. Omaha, Kansas City and other urban areas throughout the great plains have a record number of women running for state and city level offices.

There was a lot of activity in 2017 already, but this has lead to more concrete involvement in 2018, an election year. Trump will lose a lot of support. Kavanaugh and Trump himself have drawn enough attention to themselves, so this will also be a #metoo election. Women's rights, including reproductive rights (at stake with Kavanaugh appointment) will be more strongly supported than the traditional GOP "Jesus guns and babies" that we hear from the prairie.

Trump himself is in a bit of trouble, as there is no judicial candidate after Kavanaugh that he can pick who is going to be the same level of supporter of presidential autocratic rule. "You can't charge a sitting president with a crime" is what Kavaunaugh thinking amounts to.

Draining the swamp and Trump followers

The 2016 election was about many things. The majority of the country were satisfied with more things, and even with Hillary as the establishment, Obama part 2. But the very vocal white working class thought things should change. In their minds they simply wanted jobs by whatever means. Unskilled labor was the part of the economy that was dragging and we got these guys.

The problem is that the actions Trump came up with are not helping the economy as a whole. There may be more jobs in coal mining areas (though most of it is not in mines, the Wyoming coal is just mostly scooped up). Steel jobs may have improved with Trump tariffs, but not the industries using that steel.

The problem we are facing is that these Trump voters are unwilling to change their lives in any way. The voters who voted Trump are going to be a key in elections in 2018 and 2020 no matter what happens to Trump. They will feel cheated if Trump is put aside and the party just continues some of his themes. The party never gave a damn about the white working class, they simply went along with all this just to get tax cuts for the wealthy class. Lobbyists also got something with the EPA essentially put on hold till Trump is gone.

The other part of draining the swamp, in the minds of the white working class, was to get rid of all the politicians established in DC for decades, the special interest groups guarding minorities. These things such as race and sexual minorities were not any part of Trump backers.

At this point we must point out that they are a minority. Working classes from 1900-1960 had a hard time moving up the ladder. They might move up to the middle class by becoming business owners. Education was not yet for the masses. For a while (1970s) even kids from working classes went to college and had a bit of success. The new white working class is a bit more of a failure. There is no interest, or perhaps the funds, to get a college education. Many just do not have the smarts for a college degree. But we cannot use this in politics, we cannot address them as losers.

Populism tends to run its course when the populace have had time to vent their frustrations and when things come to a halt as the result of presidential actions failing to meet everyday government tasks.

The Wall will not bring jobs for long, and it does not even solve the problem of illegals. There are millions already here. The tariffs Trump introduced will take a year or two to go to full effect. The rural voters will still not admit they made a mistake and that the Trump plan was a failure. "At least he tried, he was working for us!" they will claim.

There will maybe be one permanent effect: two more conservative judges. Draining the swamp will give Evangelicals something. Nobody else got anything. Well, corporations did. The Trump voter will have a hard time facing up to the fact that Trump stood with corporations every time against citizens. He in fact is mainly a corporation. Very little humanity in this man who is failing to connect with most of the country in a leader role. To but it bluntly, he is daily an asshole to most of us.

Recent book on Great Plains politics

The book by Peter J Longo is fair enough in covering the individuals that were selected. There is some criticism of Virginia Smith involving Reagan. She was a bit too gung ho about building dams. This worked in the Calamus reservoir, but when the people along the Niobrara were presented this idea, the power and irrigation produced was just too little compared to the loss of land. Instead, they went for federal protection and got a national scenic river. It took some convincing to push for some tourism on the river but soon enough all people in the are were on board. Virginia was not listening to the people well enough. On the matter of missiles in the extreme West end of Nebraska she did. Reagan had to put the missile silos on the Wyoming side.

There is even a mention of Nebraska pipeline protests in the conclusions. All in all it focuses on the positive aspects of politics here. I think that Senator Deb Fischer would not fit in the framework of the book. She has voted 100% with Trump, this just is not the way Nebraska people see things, such as the pipeline. Protecting land takes priority over right wing issues.

To generalize, republicans sought to bring food to those in need and other help to needy individuals in the state, as well as farm loans. Churches were employed in the Virginia Smith efforts to pass along food. All this was brought about with minimal government bureaucracy. That is, they want the money and they even want to help with surplus crops from time to time. But it all has to fit in with the "small government" thinking currently in vogue. Also, there is a self reliance at work, solving things entirely without the federal government, if possible.

Somewhat refreshing in the current hate filled Trump world.

The careers of Bob Dole and South Dakota's McGovern are discussed pretty much in terms of local politics. The presidential campaigns are not discussed.

White rural Trump voters and "small government"

The people voting for Trump wanted something. It was maybe jobs now, not community college. Or maybe it was the "somebody is getting something I'm not" feel of middle class and poor middle class. The poor folks in cities were maybe getting something.

They got Trump:

That winning was going to be something. They wanted to cut down government, cut down regulation etc etc. They were suspicious of government spying on us.

Guess what? They got a little. A few dollars in the paycheck. Trump himself saved millions in taxes, if he pays any. They got an impression of EPA held back and coal jobs coming back a bit. It's not doing much for jobs.

But the whole thing is pretty much a front. Trump is running a public relations campaign, mostly about him as the tough guy, savior of capitalism and the white folks old world, where gay wedding cakes do not make the press.

But the BIG government is still there. The military is big government, we spend a lot on that and they spy for "homeland security" as needed. No domestic terrorism goes undetected for long.

Corporations own government. Monsanto still writes the farm bill. In fact almost nothing has changed in the way things are done. Corporations do not care about Mexico walls, Trump war with press, abortions etc etc. They run strictly on profits. Oil rigs still are as unsafe as before Deepwater Horizon. National parks are open for drilling. Despite some friction with Trump, the Koch Brothers still dictate energy policy.

Big Government is run by corporations and Trump cut their tax. You've been had. Your hourly wages went down as far as buying power. They have gone down for decades.

I’ve neglected a small group of Trump voters who actually do know where the money goes. These people do not mind the money going to corporations. ”As long as it does not go to the poor people in the city. They should get a job!” Most of them have a job. At minimum wage, some of them have to have two. No such problem in Denmark. See the video.

Meanwhile in Denmark, with 56% tax:

All those decisions were made by voters and politicians. Not corporations. But the corporations adjust.

Finally, a small anecdote from a bike tour on the prairie:

A rancher allowed us to set up a rest stop across his ranch entrance. He told us about his 200 bison and thousands of acres. And he sounded very involved in county level matters.

People in these counties are 90% Republican. They support county spending. You need three things: roads, water supply and storm water/creek management. Healthcare? You just die and hand over the farm or ranch to kids.

If a rancher were able to control his tax money better, he would pay. Lets say he pays 5% state and 30% federal, he would be happier taking that 30% and sending 20% to the state and 10% to feds. He gets farm insurance, flood insurance, subsidies back. But why route that money through the feds at all? Just keep it here.

Trump's false message

I don't know who I am writing this for, but here goes.

President Trump goes to give rallies and makes bold generalizations and follows that by "believe me!" It's not like any of the people there are to go home to check on these claims. They already believed them before he said them. There is a tendency of people in a country such as ours that has two major parties to believe that people supporting the other party, not yours, do all the bad things.

Trump claims Democrats are unpatriotic. False. They don't spend enough on defense. False, there was never a reduction on spending. Welfare ended in the Clinton era and is no longer the safety net it once was, though some is left. Trump is financing all his grandiose things, military and tax cuts, by borrowing. when the bill comes, he is no longer president.

Some of his claims are ridiculous. Foreigners do not commit all the crimes, in fact it makes no sense to commit crimes. If you are working illegally, you are more likely to be caught after a crime, then deported. Just do your job and lay low. If you have a green card and commit a serious crime, the card is taken away and you are jailed or deported.

Trump claims are also stereotypes. Blacks are lazy, Mexicans are rapists. There is no truth to any of it, though poor people do end up in desperate situations where a wealthier person would not. The stereotypes only exist for his followers to nod to and think "yeah, I though so. Tell them, Trump!"

Democrats are soft on crime. Really? And where it happens, it is not a bad thing. The liberal judges we support give shorter sentences. But maybe that is because we do not want to support the private prison industry. That industry is also making good profit on the illegals arrested, instead of being deported with no time in prison. You are paying for that. You are paying for the detained children too, more than they  would cost if they were with their parents. Other than that, drug possession and small time use (legal in many states) is not really treated well by locking up the accused for years.

These things Trump brings up are certainly there, and we even have gangs he mentions. But most of this is never going to affect life in suburbia where most of the white voters for Trump live. Even less in rural areas. The prescription opiate epidemic hit all of the middle of the country because they were legal. All you had to do was go to the nearest drug store.

Trump also likes to reward evangelicals. And his claims are not wong: Democrats support abortion rights. That may be some of the small long term effect he will have. The supreme court does not change often. The right wing judges are on Trump’s side. They want small government and side with corporations over citizens.

Perhaps the white working class voter thought it was a package deal? Guns babies and Jesus, check. American dream, check. Foreigners out, check.  Not so fast. The American dream is just a trick. You have not improved your standard of living for 50 years. Trickle down economics does not work. You are worse off than your parents, as healthcare is more expensive past the age of 50. It may cure your cancer, but you will die penniless if you make it to age 90.

Environmental damage can be undone more quickly after Trump is gone. It is all EPA and executive order, the law has not changed. There is no "clean coal". Trump simply repeats stuff he hears. Some directly from Fox and Friends. If your world is Fox News and Trump, you can be safe in your make believe world for a couple of years, but it cannot last.

Trump on shaky ground near treason

As we all know, president Trump went to Helsinki to prop up his shaky claim to the presidency. He called his first witness: Vladimir Putin.

He claims the FBI is unreliable. There is no evidence of this, as testified by the FBI agent whose phone texts had been examined for months. He said "we must stop him", referring to us voters (not the FBI). That is the task now, in the 2018 election. Unfortunately Trump supporters are still 100% behind him. Because they voted for him. They can’t admit that their abortion/tax/immigrant/etc stance put a dangerous man in the White House. It is in fact hard for anyone to come to terms that they supported the wrong guy. Losing a job might finally do it.

Trump's actions will come out within his four years, and whatever he did will be in the press before the 2020 election. It is not appropriate for a president to be a conspiracy theorist and certainly not to commit treason. My belief is that Russia owns him by immense loans channeled to him over the years. Russia has his mortgage, by several intermediaries.

People who voted for Trump and went to the rallies are pretending nothing happened. These people are still holding on to the birther era Obama conspiracies, so we know the change is slow. Plus they voted Trump so they will never admit they were wrong, that the man is an actual danger to the US. Out here there is a chance to think that all that stuff is "out in Europe" or "out in Russia" and does not affect us. But the world affairs are not that simple that you can just order China for example. The tariffs will be felt by every American by 2020.

But we will see. I'll just post a campaign ad to explain that. Good luck to all brave candidates challenging the increasingly ridiculous GOP candidates standing behind Trump. The entire Trump experience has shaken the principles of Democracy here on the prairie as well, but apparently other things are more important to Trump voters.

What was it about Obama the right hated?

The Trump voters hated him as both black and "foreigner."

The times were mostly stable in the Obama years after the bail out of the Bush catastrophe. Obama inherited most foreign touchy spots from Bush, but Libya may have been new.

Yet the talk radio guys and the far right absolutely hated his liberal policy and foreign policy. On the one hand insurance was labeled BIG government. The foreign policy was the confusing part to me.

Only now with Trump in charge do I understand what they wanted. They did not want a diplomat or negotiator with Europe or with war torn countries. They wanted an autocrat. A leader of the "free world" who does not negotiate. He announces policy and "others must follow." This goes for trade, NATO, everything.

I'm glad we got that cleared up then. For them an asshole is a perfect leader. He is in Europe trying to break up the EU now.

2018 elections

The 2018 elections are turning out to be a for Trump or against Trump run, even though the people running are congress members. The rural people strongly supported Trump, and even the most reluctant Republican in the middle is running as a Trump supporter. Many voters in the rural areas believed in the "draining the swamp" and "he's just getting started" goals. farmers in the plains have for generations thought of themselves as businessmen. In addition corporations own many farms. Rural people go with supporting the independent spirit of farming and somehow associate Republicans as support for farming. The farm bill is actually dictated by corporations so I don't know what is left of this independence.

There were in fact some libertarians voting in 2016. These people might be excused for voting Trump in that they have somehow gotten in their heads that all government is bad. Cut down government? Count me in! These people are not necessarily racist, and often disagree with the large group of Evangelicals here on the the prairie on social issues, mainly abortion. Their views on immigrants vary.

The news have run some editorials on Trump giving him more credit for his second year. It seems he is getting a few more things done, despite botching the immigrant children issue. One thing that makes the editorial writers more confident is Trump naming the new justice. However, it does not really change the voters any, in fact liberals are even more opposed to Trump and any GOP senator or congressman in the November election. Voter turnout will be good due to this divisiveness in the country.

The opposite is true of Colorado on the left as well as New Mexico below it. There are areas with Indian reservations such as in South Dakota, and the Democrats carry those. Nebraska has just two big cities and the Democrats carry those in presidential elections. The congresspeople are now all Republicans with one "sleeper" Democratic candidate running for the senate seat. Senator Fischer is a one term senator who has gone to Washington and supported Trump 100%. She has not gotten involved in farm state issues and a was a key player getting the education secretary approved. She has angered more Democrats in her state than recent Tea Party leaning senators or congressmen.

Ben Sasse has turned out to be a talker. He criticizes Trump, then:

U.S. Sen. Ben Sasse, R-Neb., has written some witty tweets and interesting Facebook posts critical of the Trump administration. However, he has voted consistently with the administration: yes on the tax bill, yes on Obamacare repeals, yes on every executive branch nomination save one, yes on federal judge nominations and no on legislation to protect special counsel Robert Mueller.

Kansas has no senate seat in the race and the recent past does not suggest a Democrat would have much chance in a national election. They do have a congressional Democratic candidate with some hope, Brent Welder, who worked on Bernie Sanders' presidential campaign.  Oklahoma is entirely red.

Trade Wars

Trump's claims about foreigners and jobs have all turned out to be false. The jobs and the products will go abroad no matter what he does. Tariffs caused just that: Harley Davidson will make motorcycles for Europe abroad, due to Trump.

How long will it take for Trump followers to realize that just Trump repeating a statement over and over does not make it true? This authority is incompetent, he does not need respect.

Trump has told his followers that trade with Mexico is unfair, trade with Canada is unfair. No explanation is needed for the followers, as they know the world is unfair to the US! The countries don’t let us sell cheaper GMO products, or maybe cheese. The problem with farm goods is that most countries exclude certain farm products from international agreements. This is for the purpose of keeping some food production at home. It is not a good idea to import 90% of your food, there could be some event that leaves you without food.

But we trade fancy finished goods. Let’s take an example. Two factories make 1000 cars in a month. In Mexico they make 1000 red Malibus. In Alabama they make 1000 blue Malibus. No red Malibus are made in USA. US buyers want some red Malibus. With cheaper labor, 150 red Malibus are sent to US at Mexican bulk price. Mexicans want some blue Malibus. In exchange for the same money, 100 American blue Malibus are sent over.

Mexicans end up 50 Malibus less.  They sell all the 850 remaining Malibus to Brazil, who were willing to pay more than Americans.

Can this sort of unbalanced trade with a low wage country be fixed with tariffs? Not really. If the Mexicans end up selling the Malibus to the US with a price that is the price we pay, the tariff just ends up with our government. We then sell Malibus with to Mexico with 0% tariff. The Mexicans still lose.

Trump has convinced his followers that tariffs somehow allow us to control trade. If we put tariffs on products coming in, the selling country will do the same to us. Both governments collect tariffs but consumers lose.

Initial reports of the war with China claim Trump is winning and the stocks will not suffer. But there are always people paid to write optimistic articles and columns in financial papers and major newspapers. These are there for the purpose of making people "trust" stocks. You can look at stocks yourself and see which ones depend the most on trade.

Conservative business minded peopled have looked at tariffs. They analyze jobs, income, consumption of goods. From the internet:

Let’s look at an example of how that happens. The U.S. government decides to implement a tariff that will “saves” 1,200 full-time jobs at a tire plant.

Each of the saved jobs pays an average wage of $40,070 a year ($20.69 per hour). Sounds pretty good, doesn’t it? Maybe that’s a policy we should support.

But what if I told you that those 1,200 jobs cost the American consumer $900,000 each? Oh, and while 1,200 jobs were created, it came at a cost to the American economy of 2,531 jobs. That might make us reconsider whether the policy was all that beneficial.

Unfortunately, this is not a hypothetical situation: it’s the real-world effect of a tariff on Chinese tires.

In his 2012 State of the Union address, President Obama claimed that, “over a thousand Americans are working today because we stopped a surge in Chinese tires.” What he failed to mention is that for every tire job that was “saved” two other jobs were lost or not created and that each job “saved” cost Americans an additional $900,000 a year.

If the workers only got $40,070, what happened to the other $859,930? It went into the pockets of the tire companies, many of which are not even located in the U.S. When the companies pushed for the tariffs to “save American jobs” what they were really doing was increase their own profits by preying on the economic ignorance of the American public about the effects of tariffs. (Crony capitalists are gifted in finding ways to get the public to support policies that make them richer while making other citizens poorer.)

 (From ACTON INSTITUTE POWERBLOG: Why tariffs and protectionism make Americans poorer)

We will still buy the goods we need and spend the same amount of money. We will just get a smaller TV, or a product with less features for the same money as before.

This sort of analysis is too complicated for the Trump voter to get. They, including the pig farmer in Iowa still coming to grips with export tariffs, refuse to believe Trump is wrong, simply a clever bullshitter who knows his audience.