Is Anti-Trump Hysteria America's Most Ridiculous Moment?

I don't have a crystal ball, but you don't need one to know that, ten or twenty years hence, President Trump will not be remembered as "literally Hitler."  The now-coming-of-age SJWs who quake in fear at night over Trump's rhetoric will get older and will eventually redirect their energies into more productive activities like a career and family.

Sure, they'll probably be replaced by a new crop of young, left-wing idealists at some point down the road, but like the generation of hippies before them who later ushered in Reagan-era conservatism, the modern SJW may simply wake up one day and realize that there are far scarier things in this world than President Trump. 

As for those twenty-somethings today who spend their afternoons in safe spaces provided by their college, or attending protests wearing full-body vagina suits, or pointlessly screaming at the sky, I wonder whether they will look back ten years from now and think, "Man, what I did back then was so brave" – or will they come to the realization that they took part in what is, and hopefully always will be, America's most ridiculous moment?

That's what anti-Trump hysteria is: our most ridiculous moment as a nation.  These puppets at the end of the strings just don't know it yet.

To pretend all of these theatrics are happening because Donald Trump is actually some right-wing radical should be laughable.  Consider the facts. 

First, there's the border security issue.  The hottest-selling snake oil peddled by Democrats is that Trump is a racist for wanting to take measures to strengthen border security and enforce federal laws.  But until recently, nearly all Democrats advocated the same thing.  Despite his executive orders to undermine federal immigration laws during his presidency, Barack Obama said in 2006 that "we cannot allow people to pour into the U.S. undetected, undocumented, and unchecked.  Americans are right to demand better border security." 

It was reasonable then, as was Nancy Pelosi's and Chuck Schumer's support for a border "fence" in 2006, and no activists felt the urge to scream at the sky over it.  But when Trump says the same thing, these SJWs lose their minds.  They, you see, know far better than these victim groups they speak for just how dangerous Trump is, and how much minorities really fear this kind of rhetoric.

But here are some fun facts when it comes to Trump's campaign and presidency.

A greater percentage of the Hispanic, black, and Asian racial demographics voted for Trump than Mitt Romney, meaning that Trump is actually more attractive to minority voters than the more traditional Republicans who'd run before him.  And where the data exist, they show that minority support is increasing with his presidency.

Trump offered a better economy, fueled by reduced regulation and lower taxes, which would allow more individuals within all communities to thrive.  Broadly, he offered a promise that he would seek to cauterize the massive influx of illegal alien trespassers who compete for wages in unskilled labor markets, who, additionally, take advantage of taxpayer-funded education, or social programs like welfare which are designed to uniquely benefit American citizens, not non-citizens.

"What do you have to lose?" Trump asked the black community.  He then won an 8% share of the black vote in 2016.  That's not much, but it's about 33% higher than Mitt Romney enjoyed in 2012.  Since, his approval rating among blacks has leapt higher.  Perhaps due to a black unemployment rate that is lower than ever since it began being tracked by the Department of Labor in 1972, or due to support from Kanye West and rising conservative stars like Candace Owens, Trump now enjoys, as of two months ago, polling data showing support as high as 40% (Rasmussen).  Some claim that that number is high, but does it matter?  As Victor Davis Hanson writes in the Washington Post, even "20 percent African-American support for Mr. Trump would all but dismantle Democratic Party hopes for 2020."

What about Hispanics?  Don't they hate all his talk about enforcing immigration laws and his rhetoric about dangerous aliens who enter our country illegally?  Media talking heads tell us so, but the data say otherwise. 

Twenty-nine percent of Latinos voted for Trump in 2016, two points more than Romney, and they, too, are warming up to President Trump.  As of October, he enjoyed approval ratings of up to 41% versus "Barack Obama's 49% approval rating among the same demographic at roughly the same time in his presidency," laments Leon Krauze at Slate.

But Muslims hate Trump for his proposed banning of immigration from Muslim countries with ties to terrorism, right?  Well, he held this same position in the campaign, and nearly three times as many Muslims voted for Trump than Romney. 

Not to put too fine a point on this, but it wasn't Trump's being a right-wing radical that won him the election.  It was lower-income, moderate Democrats who ultimately secured his presidency in 2016, not the wealthy or the right-wing fringe, as so many leftists believe.

Consider this.  Romney won 54% of the $100K-plus income demographic in 2012, while getting just 38% of the greater than $50K-earners.  Trump, on the other hand, won only 47% of the $100K-plus-earners, but 41% of the greater than $50K-earners (hint: there are a lot more of the latter).

Perhaps most importantly, his campaign rhetoric was attractive to Democrat voters in Blue Wall states like Pennsylvania, Wisconsin, Indiana, and Michigan because he campaigned on a desire to protect industry, via tariffs, in these highly unionized states (Trump won 4% more support from union members in 2016 than Romney in 2012 and perhaps even did better than Reagan in courting unions).  Entitlement reform, it should be noted, was not on his to-do list.  He was adamant that America needs more, not less, spending on infrastructure.  These are traditionally Democrat positions, which he employed to win their votes.

In other words, Trump was so balanced a candidate that he not only spoke to much of the traditionally Republican base, but caused a political defection from many moderate Democrats.  And not only did he win a greater share of votes among the coveted minority demographics whom Democrats had believed to be perennial Democrat voters for decades to come, but his support among those demographics is increasing.

With all of that in mind, it's understandable that young, crazily idealistic SJWs are frustrated by the fact that the rest of America doesn't tilt at their windmills.  Their response is to childishly scream at the sky and crawl into their safe spaces, emerging occasionally to assert that Trump is a Nazi.

When these young people look back at this moment, ten or twenty years from now, will they recognize how ridiculous all of that is? 

There's evidence that they've already begun to do so.  Over the last two years, support for Democrats among Millennials has plunged by nearly ten points.  Perhaps an Investor's Business Daily editorial sums up the reason for this best:

[A] funny thing happened over the last two years.  The millennial generation started growing up.

Here's hoping they continue on that path.

William Sullivan blogs at Political Palaver and can be followed on Twitter.

I don't have a crystal ball, but you don't need one to know that, ten or twenty years hence, President Trump will not be remembered as "literally Hitler."  The now-coming-of-age SJWs who quake in fear at night over Trump's rhetoric will get older and will eventually redirect their energies into more productive activities like a career and family.

Sure, they'll probably be replaced by a new crop of young, left-wing idealists at some point down the road, but like the generation of hippies before them who later ushered in Reagan-era conservatism, the modern SJW may simply wake up one day and realize that there are far scarier things in this world than President Trump. 

As for those twenty-somethings today who spend their afternoons in safe spaces provided by their college, or attending protests wearing full-body vagina suits, or pointlessly screaming at the sky, I wonder whether they will look back ten years from now and think, "Man, what I did back then was so brave" – or will they come to the realization that they took part in what is, and hopefully always will be, America's most ridiculous moment?

That's what anti-Trump hysteria is: our most ridiculous moment as a nation.  These puppets at the end of the strings just don't know it yet.

To pretend all of these theatrics are happening because Donald Trump is actually some right-wing radical should be laughable.  Consider the facts. 

First, there's the border security issue.  The hottest-selling snake oil peddled by Democrats is that Trump is a racist for wanting to take measures to strengthen border security and enforce federal laws.  But until recently, nearly all Democrats advocated the same thing.  Despite his executive orders to undermine federal immigration laws during his presidency, Barack Obama said in 2006 that "we cannot allow people to pour into the U.S. undetected, undocumented, and unchecked.  Americans are right to demand better border security." 

It was reasonable then, as was Nancy Pelosi's and Chuck Schumer's support for a border "fence" in 2006, and no activists felt the urge to scream at the sky over it.  But when Trump says the same thing, these SJWs lose their minds.  They, you see, know far better than these victim groups they speak for just how dangerous Trump is, and how much minorities really fear this kind of rhetoric.

But here are some fun facts when it comes to Trump's campaign and presidency.

A greater percentage of the Hispanic, black, and Asian racial demographics voted for Trump than Mitt Romney, meaning that Trump is actually more attractive to minority voters than the more traditional Republicans who'd run before him.  And where the data exist, they show that minority support is increasing with his presidency.

Trump offered a better economy, fueled by reduced regulation and lower taxes, which would allow more individuals within all communities to thrive.  Broadly, he offered a promise that he would seek to cauterize the massive influx of illegal alien trespassers who compete for wages in unskilled labor markets, who, additionally, take advantage of taxpayer-funded education, or social programs like welfare which are designed to uniquely benefit American citizens, not non-citizens.

"What do you have to lose?" Trump asked the black community.  He then won an 8% share of the black vote in 2016.  That's not much, but it's about 33% higher than Mitt Romney enjoyed in 2012.  Since, his approval rating among blacks has leapt higher.  Perhaps due to a black unemployment rate that is lower than ever since it began being tracked by the Department of Labor in 1972, or due to support from Kanye West and rising conservative stars like Candace Owens, Trump now enjoys, as of two months ago, polling data showing support as high as 40% (Rasmussen).  Some claim that that number is high, but does it matter?  As Victor Davis Hanson writes in the Washington Post, even "20 percent African-American support for Mr. Trump would all but dismantle Democratic Party hopes for 2020."

What about Hispanics?  Don't they hate all his talk about enforcing immigration laws and his rhetoric about dangerous aliens who enter our country illegally?  Media talking heads tell us so, but the data say otherwise. 

Twenty-nine percent of Latinos voted for Trump in 2016, two points more than Romney, and they, too, are warming up to President Trump.  As of October, he enjoyed approval ratings of up to 41% versus "Barack Obama's 49% approval rating among the same demographic at roughly the same time in his presidency," laments Leon Krauze at Slate.

But Muslims hate Trump for his proposed banning of immigration from Muslim countries with ties to terrorism, right?  Well, he held this same position in the campaign, and nearly three times as many Muslims voted for Trump than Romney. 

Not to put too fine a point on this, but it wasn't Trump's being a right-wing radical that won him the election.  It was lower-income, moderate Democrats who ultimately secured his presidency in 2016, not the wealthy or the right-wing fringe, as so many leftists believe.

Consider this.  Romney won 54% of the $100K-plus income demographic in 2012, while getting just 38% of the greater than $50K-earners.  Trump, on the other hand, won only 47% of the $100K-plus-earners, but 41% of the greater than $50K-earners (hint: there are a lot more of the latter).

Perhaps most importantly, his campaign rhetoric was attractive to Democrat voters in Blue Wall states like Pennsylvania, Wisconsin, Indiana, and Michigan because he campaigned on a desire to protect industry, via tariffs, in these highly unionized states (Trump won 4% more support from union members in 2016 than Romney in 2012 and perhaps even did better than Reagan in courting unions).  Entitlement reform, it should be noted, was not on his to-do list.  He was adamant that America needs more, not less, spending on infrastructure.  These are traditionally Democrat positions, which he employed to win their votes.

In other words, Trump was so balanced a candidate that he not only spoke to much of the traditionally Republican base, but caused a political defection from many moderate Democrats.  And not only did he win a greater share of votes among the coveted minority demographics whom Democrats had believed to be perennial Democrat voters for decades to come, but his support among those demographics is increasing.

With all of that in mind, it's understandable that young, crazily idealistic SJWs are frustrated by the fact that the rest of America doesn't tilt at their windmills.  Their response is to childishly scream at the sky and crawl into their safe spaces, emerging occasionally to assert that Trump is a Nazi.

When these young people look back at this moment, ten or twenty years from now, will they recognize how ridiculous all of that is? 

There's evidence that they've already begun to do so.  Over the last two years, support for Democrats among Millennials has plunged by nearly ten points.  Perhaps an Investor's Business Daily editorial sums up the reason for this best:

[A] funny thing happened over the last two years.  The millennial generation started growing up.

Here's hoping they continue on that path.

William Sullivan blogs at Political Palaver and can be followed on Twitter.