14 ms·

> The fact that rural infrastructure is crumbling That's what I don't get. Do Trump voters think he gives a flying fuck about the state of rural infrastructure

by Veen 10y ago

> The fact that rural infrastructure is crumbling That's what I don't get. Do Trump voters think he gives a flying fuck about the state of rural infrastructure or the lives of poor people? I don't see it. Sure, the incumbent elite are feckless, tribal, irresponsible, greedy, and dishonest, but Trump is worse, obviously so. I guess that's the problem in a two-party system. Usually you choose the better of two bad options. In this case, all the options were so bad that people just said "fuck it".

christophilus 10y ago
I know democrats who voted for Trump. One of the reasons is that he is planning on investing $500,000,000,000 in infrastructure, including rural infrastructure. So yes, I think economics played a large role in his win.
- Veen 10y ago
  But I'd ask myself where is that half-a-trillion dollars going to come from, on top of the increases in military spending, the thousands-of-miles-long Mexico wall, the massively expensive roundups and deportations, and so on. Especially when taxes are apparently also going to be reduced. And asking myself that question, I'd think his promises somewhat empty and opportunistic.
- tzs 10y ago
  Obama pushed hard for big spending on infrastructure from the start of his first term. Not only do we need it in general, but then it also would have greatly helped push the recovery from the recession along. Republicans in Congress were able to block it until they took control of both Houses, and then it was effectively dead. Do they really think Trump has a better chance of getting Congress to pass a large infrastructure bill? I haven't looked into it in great detail, but from what I have seen it doesn't look like the incoming Republican House and Senate are at all inclined to be looser with the pursestrings now. Also, Clinton's plan also called for large infrastructure spending, although only about half of what Trump's plan calls for. That makes it hard for me to understand why a Democrat who voted for Trump would cite infrastructure spending as a reason.
  - jessaustin 10y ago
    Do you refer to the "shovel-ready" stimulus? They burned through $830B on that, to little effect. One would hope that the next big infrastructure effort would be better focused on actual infrastructure. http://www.wsj.com/articles/SB10001424052702303945704579387692278347858 http://www.wsj.com/articles/SB100014240527023039457045793876...

by Veen 10y ago

christophilus 10y ago

I know democrats who voted for Trump. One of the reasons is that he is planning on investing $500,000,000,000 in infrastructure, including rural infrastructure. So yes, I think economics played a large role in his win.

Veen 10y ago
But I'd ask myself where is that half-a-trillion dollars going to come from, on top of the increases in military spending, the thousands-of-miles-long Mexico wall, the massively expensive roundups and deportations, and so on. Especially when taxes are apparently also going to be reduced. And asking myself that question, I'd think his promises somewhat empty and opportunistic.
tzs 10y ago
Obama pushed hard for big spending on infrastructure from the start of his first term. Not only do we need it in general, but then it also would have greatly helped push the recovery from the recession along. Republicans in Congress were able to block it until they took control of both Houses, and then it was effectively dead. Do they really think Trump has a better chance of getting Congress to pass a large infrastructure bill? I haven't looked into it in great detail, but from what I have seen it doesn't look like the incoming Republican House and Senate are at all inclined to be looser with the pursestrings now. Also, Clinton's plan also called for large infrastructure spending, although only about half of what Trump's plan calls for. That makes it hard for me to understand why a Democrat who voted for Trump would cite infrastructure spending as a reason.
- jessaustin 10y ago
  Do you refer to the "shovel-ready" stimulus? They burned through $830B on that, to little effect. One would hope that the next big infrastructure effort would be better focused on actual infrastructure. http://www.wsj.com/articles/SB10001424052702303945704579387692278347858 http://www.wsj.com/articles/SB100014240527023039457045793876...