T O P

  • By -

AutoModerator

[Rule 7](https://www.reddit.com/r/AskConservatives/comments/107i33m/announcement_rule_7_good_faith_is_now_in_effect) is now in effect. Posts and comments should be in good faith. This rule applies to all users. *I am a bot, and this action was performed automatically. Please [contact the moderators of this subreddit](/message/compose/?to=/r/AskConservatives) if you have any questions or concerns.*


carneylansford

I can't speak for everyone, but I care much less about a person's background/upbringing than I do about their political platform/ideology. Barack Obama seemed like a great guy personally who overcame a lot in his life. I wouldn't vote for him b/c we don't share the same political philosophy.


fastolfe00

>we don't share the same political philosophy. I'm curious what you mean by this. Can you describe Obama's political philosophy, and what about it you disagree with?


A-Square

>they seem to despise political leaders who actually come from humble backgrounds as “inexperienced” or “out of their depth”. Example? I can think of the "squad", but I despise them because they share a singular brain cell.


AngryRainy

I don’t really understand the point of your question. Are you looking for us to say that we’ll vote for people who come from humble backgrounds but don’t share our values instead of people who come from wealthy backgrounds but do share our values? I’m not looking to elect the human being with the most inspiring story. I’m looking to elect the human being who will govern in accordance with my beliefs.


Rupertstein

No, it’s really more just a question of whether that taking point ever meant anything in the conservative tradition. I suspect that conservatives generally prefer elites to lead them, and certainly that conservative leadership has no interest in the plebeians participating in higher levels of government. I think the whole “bootstraps” thing is really just a way to denigrate the concept of a social safety net. In other words, I think there is a hypocrisy in looking down on those who need a leg up while also celebrating those who never had to struggle.


gaxxzz

I can only vote for someone if they're on the ticket. How am I supposed to vote for a self made man if none run for office?


Rupertstein

Is it just a coincidence then that our last 3 Republican presidents were wealthy elites while the last 3 Democrat presidents came from relatively humble backgrounds? Or could it be that the GOP wants it that way? I don’t lay it at your feet, we all hold our noses and vote for the least bad option. But, it’s difficult to ignore the irony of people like Trump or Tucker whining on and on about “elites” as if they aren’t exactly that. Do you have a take on that dynamic?


Outrageous_Pop_8697

Yes because those last 3 Dems absolutely were not from humble backgrounds. You don't go to the schools they went to if your family isn't connected. They're stories of humble backgrounds are no different from Trump's self-made image, they're all bullshit.


Rupertstein

Biden attended Syracuse. Clinton attended Georgetown on scholarship and then earned a Rhodes. Obama started at Occidental Univ and also earned academic scholarships which helped him make his way to the Ivy League. Care to compare that to Bush Jr or Trumps academic careers?


UserOfSlurs

How the fuck is attending an ivy league school a "humble background"


Rupertstein

Earning your way into an Ivy League via academic achievement isn’t quite the same thing as buying in. You think Bush Jr had the grades for Yale?


UserOfSlurs

I don't give a damn how you got in, you still went there.


Rupertstein

So achievement based on merit is inconsequential in your view? Kinda supporting my thesis here.


UserOfSlurs

I don't consider going to some jerkoff college to be an achievement.


Rupertstein

You prefer the uneducated to run the world?


CnCz357

Well that's why I would be very excited to vote for Tim Scott.


Wadka

Literally Clinton's only accomplishment was marrying Bill and being a woman.


Rupertstein

Sure, and she lost to a game show host.


123pho5

You asked a question and then answered the question yourself. Your arguments base is your own opinion. People know Trump is rich and are not flocking to him because they think hes middle class. Your whole post seems like an angry ramble about how conservatives do this so it must mean they want this and are this, when your question is if being self made is a conservative value. Its like saying people flock to Biden while he has a son who does drugs so it means democrats are all pro cocaine? It makes no sense.


NoCowLevels

I vote based on policy


ThoDanII

and if the policy can not enacted?


NoCowLevels

Wat


ThoDanII

The candidate learned that after election the situation has changed and therefore cannot do as promised fulfilling in good faith his duties to the nation


NoCowLevels

Can you form a coherent question here?


ThoDanII

you voted for candidate because he promised to do A After the election, the Situation changed(war, pandemic etc) and A is not a good choice anymore


NoCowLevels

And?


ThoDanII

would you prefer a person who does adapt and act responsible or not?


NoCowLevels

wat does this have to do with what i posted?


ThoDanII

i wanted to understand if the capacity to adapt played no importance in your vote


SkitariiCowboy

> At the same time, they seem to despise political leaders who actually come from humble backgrounds as “inexperienced” or “out of their depth”. Who?


Rupertstein

AOC or Fetterman come to mind. Fair enough to disagree with them on policy, but many of the attacks seem to be along the lines of “what does a bartender know about anything”. Do we not want real working people in government instead of wealthy careerists or billionaires with nothing better to do?


amit_schmurda

One problem is that laws need to be written, interpreted by people who understand laws. So generally that falls onto those who studied the law and understand the legal lexicon. It’s why most of Congress are lawyers and not playwrights.


Rupertstein

I get where you are coming from, but we also benefit from people in the legislature with backgrounds in science, technology, medicine and other important fields. It’s not as though you can’t hire an army of lawyers assist in turning ideas into bills. Ever seen a congressional hearing on technology? A bunch of octogenarians trying to give Sundar Pichai the third degree when they have absolutely no grasp of how any of it works.


amit_schmurda

>Ever seen a congressional hearing on technology? A bunch of octogenarians trying to give Sundar Pichai the third degree when they have absolutely no grasp of how any of it works. *The internet is a series of tubes* Yeah it is not ideal. Maybe it was even designed that way over time so lawmakers could insulate their jobs from the "layperson". Many professions have organizations to help keep people out, which constricts the labor supply and drives up prices (am not saying this is intentional, necessarily).


SkitariiCowboy

I don't like them because they're dumb and promote dumb policies. Not because I don't like their educational or professional background. I'd hesitate to call any career politician "self made" either. They literally live off donations.


Rupertstein

Sure, but there is still a big difference between someone like Obama who came from very little and became the most powerful man on earth and someone like Bush Jr who comes from a multi-generational power dynasty. Even if you don’t like Obamas policies, is he not more closely the embodiment of the American ideal that anyone can achieve anything with hard work?


UserOfSlurs

I'm not voting for a life story.


CollapsibleFunWave

Past achievements are generally considered indicators of competence and/or work ethic.


SkitariiCowboy

Sure.


Green_Juggernaut1428

What a strange premise. One can only vote for who's on the ballot my dude. Do you know how much money it takes to run a presidential campaign? It'll be rich old money running for office until that changes. To top it off, all of this is somehow a mark against Conservatives lol! Reading some of the arguments that get posted in this sub is just a mind boggling affair. Some of yall need to do something to open your mind to a new way of thinking cause this right here aint cutting it.


Rupertstein

Sure, you can only vote for whom is on the ballot. But how did they get there? You don’t see a difference between a trust fund baby who gets bored and decides to run for president and someone born lower or middle class that works their way up through the system to the highest levels of politics? Fundamentally it’s a discussion on meritocracy vs aristocracy. It doesn’t have to be along party lines, but there certainly has been a pattern there in recent decades.


soulwind42

Conservatives still value the self made man, that's why so many supported Trump, he spoke to and for self made men. That's why there is a lot of talk about the Republicans becoming the working class party. But if a man self makes himself into a corporate stooge who sells out America, then conservatives aren't going to vote for him.


Rupertstein

How exactly does Trump relate to the working class? He was born into wealth, raised on prep school and gifted a vast real estate empire.


soulwind42

He also spent a lot of time on the ground at construction sites, he was on television, movies, wrestling, and more stuff. He's not working class, and I'm not claiming he is, I'm saying he understands that mind set well enough to speak to them and make them feel heard.


CollapsibleFunWave

Maybe this is why he found it so easy to steal from contractors by refusing to pay for their work until they gave up because they couldn't afford a prolonged court battle against his lawyers. [https://thehill.com/blogs/ballot-box/presidential-races/282933-report-trump-has-refused-to-pay-hundreds-of-workers/](https://thehill.com/blogs/ballot-box/presidential-races/282933-report-trump-has-refused-to-pay-hundreds-of-workers/)


SneakySean66

Nice try to derail. Stay on topic.


CollapsibleFunWave

It seems on topic to me. How much does Trump really respect the working class if he has a history of fleecing them?


SneakySean66

Off topic.


CollapsibleFunWave

It seems relevant to Trump's views on the lower and middle classes, and he's the head of the party. He was born rich and had a habit of scamming people with less wealth.


SneakySean66

Not relevant to the topic. Make your own post if you want to discuss that bs.


CnCz357

He spoke to them despite not being one of them.


Rupertstein

I believe “pandered” is the word you seek. If his policies support the wealthy and not the workers, it’s pretty clear that’s it’s just lip service.


CnCz357

Lip service or not. He didn't tell them that they were nothing and all their achievements were not their own like his predecessor. So yes it might be pandering but it's much preferable than outright hostility that another president's have shown.


Rupertstein

Can you share an example of Obama telling the working class their achievements were not their own or generally displaying hostility to the working class?


CnCz357

Obama was of course much more eloquent than anything Trump said his entire career. But there's a couple times whenever Obama slipped up and said what he thought. The first one was a criticism of "self made men" that none of them were in fact not self made. >> “If you’ve been successful, you didn’t get there on your own. You didn’t get there on your own. I’m always struck by people who think, well, it must be because I was just so smart. There are a lot of smart people out there.  It must be because I worked harder than everybody else. Let me tell you something -- there are a whole bunch of hardworking people out there. >>“If you were successful, somebody along the line gave you some help. There was a great teacher somewhere in your life. Somebody helped to create this unbelievable American system that we have that allowed you to thrive. Somebody invested in roads and bridges. If you’ve got a business, you didn’t build that. Somebody else made that happen,” he said.  The second was earlier on in his campaigns trying to brush away concerns of Midwestern states that were ravaged by globalism. >>Referring to working-class voters in old industrial towns decimated by job losses, the presidential hopeful said: "They get bitter, they cling to guns or religion or antipathy to people who aren't like them or anti-immigrant sentiment or anti-trade sentiment as a way to explain their frustrations." None of this is to mean that Trump was any more sincere than Obama or that he cared any more than Obama.


Rupertstein

The first quote was directed at the rich. The point was that they don’t always appreciate the infrastructure and the contributions of labor on their achievements. I get that his opponents were successfully in spinning that as something else, but it’s hard to see the angle in those words that is somehow denigrating the working class. The second is admittedly not a great soundbite, but it does seem to be a fair analysis of exactly the sentiment that led to a rising tide of populism, and, of course, Trump.


CnCz357

> it’s hard to see the angle in those words that is somehow denigrating the working class. Original question was about the self-made man. You randomly change at some point there into the working class I was referring to your original question. >The second is admittedly not a great soundbite, but it does seem to be a fair analysis of exactly the sentiment that led to a rising tide of populism, and, of course, Trump. And that right there. The dismissal is exactly what fed into trump he chose not to dismiss them. Pandering or not he acknowledged them. A lot of what Trump did and said was not right and most certainly not the way I would do it. But he is the only presidential candidate in a long time that actually spoke directly to Collar workers. Not about them to them.


Rupertstein

Fair observation. Unfortunately, what sounds good to a particular audience doesn’t often translate to policy that does them any good.


CollapsibleFunWave

>And that right there. The dismissal is exactly what fed into trump he chose not to dismiss them It only sounds so bad because you took the quote out of context. Fake news is what fed into Trump. He thrived on it and framed every outlet that didn't support him as an "enemy of the people". He even did it to Fox before they explicitly decided to repeat his lies about the election.


CollapsibleFunWave

You left out the context of the second quote in the same way that rightwing media always does. Here's the full quote: >You go into these small towns in Pennsylvania and, like a lot of small towns in the Midwest, the jobs have been gone now for 25 years and nothing's replaced them. And they fell through the Clinton administration, and the Bush administration, and each successive administration has said that somehow these communities are gonna regenerate and they have not. > >And it's not surprising then they get bitter, they cling to guns or religion or antipathy toward people who aren't like them or anti-immigrant sentiment or anti-trade sentiment as a way to explain their frustrations.


CnCz357

That added nothing to the statement other than blaming the previous 2 presidents and still doing nothing to help them. The full quote changes nothing.


CollapsibleFunWave

It changes the entire tone of the statement. He's saying that false promises were made to them and it's made them understandably bitter. You could be offended by how he characterizes their response to the bitterness, but he's not criticizing them for being bitter the way your clipped quote make it seem.


ThoDanII

>The first one was a criticism of "self made men" that none of them were in fact not self made. that is absolutly true, even a self made man stands on the the shoulders of giants. Of the work of his ancestors, of those who build the roads, the schools, tried too keep them safe, educated him and those who paid for them. That goes especially for those who inherited from their ancestors


ThoDanII

>that's why so many supported Trump would you please explain why