Home | About | Donate

Dangerous Myths About Trump That Some Progressives Cling To


Dangerous Myths About Trump That Some Progressives Cling To

Jeff Cohen, Norman Solomon

Even now, in the last days of this horrendous campaign, we’re amazed by fervent assertions coming from some progressives about Donald Trump. Here are three key myths:

Myth #1: “Trump can’t win.”

"A Trump presidency—made possible by his demagogic appeals to racism, misogyny, immigrant-bashing and Islamophobia—would empower the worst elements of U.S. society."


The more the establishment promotes the idea of Trump as a boogie-man, the worse Hillary's inevitable presidency is going be.


Uh oh everyone. Looks like you have to add Noam Chomsky to your list of "shillbots" now. Getting to be a pretty long list. Makes you wonder, almost.


Trump is going to win. Clinton has rendered many on the left completely oblivious to the real danger of Trump.

Clinton is a right wing war monger yes, but Trump represents a dangerous emboldening of the radical right domestically.


Either one could start WWIII, Hillary by design, Trump by accident. But if there is going to be a WWIII, I'd rather it be started by someone who looks like a genuine idiot/maniac, rather than someone who has the outward appearance of reasonableness. Because it will be easier to mobilize the world against the former, and we already can see that too much of the world is quite willing to let the latter option run wild.


Elect Hillary and your left leg gets cut off, elect Trump and your right leg gets cut off...some choice.

This article is posturing to blame third party voters if Trump wins, and blame Trump for Clinton's regressive agenda if she wins.

Whatever, the outcome on November 8, neither third party voters or Trump will deserve the blame. The blame will lie with the media and DNC who railroaded Clinton into the nomination despite polls during the primary confirming that Sanders would do better on November 8 than Clinton would against Trump or any of the other GOP primary contenders.


So are you saying that John Bolton is less of a hawk than Hillary? As in all presidential administrations, it is the people who surround the president, not the president, who call the shots. The people who will surround the president and the potential cabinet secretaries are more frightening than Trump. Sec. of State John Bolton? EPA Administrator, David Koch, Labor Secretary Charles Koch - with Don Blankenship as undersecretary for MSHA. Attorney General (or maybe DHS Secritarry) Joe Arpaio,... all likely under a Trump Administration.


In no way shape or form can a vote for MS Clinton be deemed a rational choice. Nor does it follow that a vote for Trump a rational choice.

If one concerned about wealth inequality, health care , the environment and is opposed to wars abroad the only rational choice is Jill Stein.


Prior to the announcement that Pence would be Trump's VP, Trump said he would turn domestic and foreign affairs over to his VP so Trump could concentrate on making America great again.

Recall Dick Cheney wearing the pants during the Dubya Regime. Expect Pence to wear the pants in the Trump Regime as far as day to day governing is concerned.

Irrespective of who wins on November 8, expect a repeat of the 2008 lame duck period when every day brought the announcement of another Clintonista or GOP darling into Obama's cabinet (and other appointments).


One of the things Wikileaks reveals is a letter from Citi-group to Barack Obama on his taking office. The list detailed who should be appointed to each cabinet position. The people Obama appointed were almost identical.

This was that hope and change guy championed by many of these pundits for the same reasons they now champion MS Clinton.


If Trump wins this election, there are numerous threads that can be traced back to "explain" his victory. It couldn't happen without the utter corruption of US politics and the economy carried out over the past 40 years by neoliberal financial and corporate oligarchs and neocon warmongers. The whole history of the USA, built on genocide, slavery and ecocide, and the long arc of US imperialism from 1898 to today, have plowed and fertilized this ground.

But in the immediacy of the campaign, the primary responsibility goes to the DNC and the Clinton campaign, the culmination of the sell-out of the Democratic Party to neoliberal financial and corporate supremacists and - as we now see transparently - to neocon military supremacists as well.

Supporters of dog-whistle "Make America Great Again!" are far more motivated in this campaign than hold-your-nose, lesser-evil Clinton voters. The deep corruption of the DNC and the Clinton campaign, thoroughly and obviously beholden to the looting class, give fed-up US voters no real place to turn from Trump and his overt ugliness.


Actually, the LEV strategy (Chomsky has repeatedly stated that LEV only applies to closely contested states) has never been more important than now. It is the first time in my 20 year career of canvassing and petitioning for Ralph Nader and Green presidential candidates that I recognize the necessity of strategic voting this time. At least Romney, McCain, even, maybe, GW Bush (arguably) are sane and potentially amenable to reason.

Why do you want Trump to be the next president? Why do you want the left to commit suicide by being responsible, in part, for delivering the US to fascism?

Do you personally know any psychopaths? I have a brother who is a criminal psychopath, and I have learned to avoid him at all costs. So I know something about psychopaths. Trump is a dangerous psychopath.

And oh, simply declaring someone to be "wrong" is not an argument that is recognized in any system of logic I know of.


Please outline the inspiring Clinton cabinet, and the ways her key appointees will move the US away from war and looting.


Limiting "progressives" to the common narrow definition which is basically the Green Party it would seem to make sense for them to downplay the dangers of Trump since the worse thing for them would be a center left candidate winning making the possibility of a socialist revolution virtually impossible, But Trump in the White House leading a right wing white nationalist political movement which would be intolerable to almost everyone left of center and and even some right of center might be enough to finally spark a socialist revolution. At least that is my take of why the Green Party does not view Trump honestly and downplays the danger he represents while greatly exaggerating the danger that Hillary Clinton represents.


Simply declaring someone to be "wrong" is not an argument.

But your despicable smear "Why do you want Trump to be the next president?" is far worse than simply not being an argument.


If Trump wins, which does seem unlikely, it is the DNC's fault entirely. They forced Clinton on the voters, and sabotaged Bernie Sanders campaign. They knew Clinton was wildly unpopular, but they did it anyway. If Trump actually somehow wins, it it their fault, not the fault of voters who are done voting for the oligarchs in the Democratic party. To Norman and Jeff, get this straight, I will never vote for a DNC Democrat again. I find them more effectively evil than the Republicans. It took the Clintons to get the telecommunications and financial "modernization" regulations through, they killed Glass-Steagall, they ended welfare, they privatized the prisons. No more lesser evil voting. You can't scare me into doing it ever again. We already voted early and voted Green all down the ballot. Done deal.


jmoffett, I agree totally. I live in one of the swing states (New Hampshire) and I am not planning to vote for the first time in my life. Thanks to the MSM, I know nothing of the independent candidates and I know enough of Hillary and Donald to not vote for either of them. If forced, I would vote for Trump and burn the country down. It needs a thorough cleansing.


First, without minimizing the dangers of a Trump presidency, a general comment on the article: can we distinguish between neocons? Robert Kagan, a prominent neocon with very dangerous views, a major advocate for the invasion of Iraq, and a Clinton supporter, is married to Victoria Nuland, a former assistant secretary of state under Clinton who was instrumental in destabilizing Ukraine, just one of the current flash points with Russia today. Hmmm.

Second, this post is somewhat unfair to progressives opposed to HRC on the merits, and who might wish to vote their conscience even in battleground states. Despite millions of words all over the internet, the argument for Hillary boils down to the "lesser evil" thing. Progressives, particularly those in battleground states, get it!! Enough already! They are not likely to vote Green in significant numbers in those states.

Hillary, the DNC, and the MSM promoted Trump's candidacy, thereby helping to legitimize him in the minds of many Americans. Now, joined by establishment Republicans who hate Trump because he won the nomination without their support, they have shifted gears and argue that everyone must vote Hillary because Trump is a "unique" danger to the survival of the republic. (How many Stein voters have not been the subject of withering criticism by family and friends on this point?)

That may or may not be true, but if Trump is elected will progressives be to blame? The blame will lie with the DNC and Democratic Party elites who sabotaged Bernie Sanders and have set back the progressive cause for what may be many years by having created the possibility of a catastrophic Trump presidency. All for the sake of Hillary's ego and ambition to be the first woman president? Will that have been worth such a price? If Trump wins, there'll be a lot of fingers pointing in many directions, but progressives will be the least blameworthy.


Oh, AMEN! You express my sentiments beautifully. Thank you. I voted today and did the same. As a 32 year old said to me later, "The way I look at it, we've had a black-skinned, Democratic president for the last 8 years and he, having PROMISED to support the indigenous people of the country, is letting them get beat up and abused at Standing Rock as we speak. So if that's what we're going to get within this system, it's all bullshit anyway." Again, amen!

If we NEVER begin to vote differently, (for whatever it's worth, given black box voting fraud that ultimately dictates the outcome) we will NEVER even approach an opportunity for anything to shift.

Of course, the ultimate scare tactic is, "We can't let Donald Trump get his finger on the nuclear button!" to which I reply, "Why the HELL do we allow ourselves to live in a situation in which there EXISTS A DAMN NUCLEAR BUTTON??!!!!" Of course, the current Democratic-Establishment President considers it prudent to push for the refurbishing of our nuclear arsenal after (inappropriately) winning a Nobel Prize for nuclear weapons abolition. This is one hell of a crazy world, but the Donald Trumps out there are only one facet of it.


I just love stunningly stupid "logic."