Hacker News Reader

Comment by Rapzid | Hacker News Reader

Apparently because they supported his campaign too.. Man, it's hard to watch. I see evidence and hope very much that the pivot people thought would happen when he got the GOP nomination has happened now that he has won the White House and everything is sinking in.

I didn't support Trump for prez, but I really hope he is successful and was a little excited shortly after the shock wore off. Excited for the unknown and the prospect that he might shake up the establishment. But reading all the news about him just surrounding himself with people who took a long shot on him pre-pivot; really eating away at my silver lining.

It was clear during the debates he had little substance in the way of issue and policy awareness. He deflected, quipped and barbed to appeal to people's emotions. He needs to be surrounding himself with the best advisors and tapping the best from either side on the shoulder.

View on HN

> Excited for the unknown and the prospect that he might shake up the establishment.

A lot of people say he isn't part of the establishment. The idea that someone who is rich and embedded in the media for the entire professional life is not part of the establishment is really confusing to me. Why do you have this perception? I am honestly curious.

> The idea that someone who is rich and embedded in the media for the entire professional life is not part of the establishment is really confusing to me.

People usually mean "political establishment" as "people who entered their party's youth org at 14 and since then never left working for their party". Which is bad because a politician who never had to do a real-world job in his life can neither understand nor empathize with the problems of the average population.

I find this point of view to be a bit of hogwash, being a politician _is_ a real life job, it's not just some part time doing-it-for-fun thing.

The realities of a politician job are wildly disconnected from a "real world" job, though. No "fire/hire at will", for example - once a politician is elected, he/she can serve the term without having to fear unemployment on the next day. No matter how he/she performs, the only way to get rid of an elected politician is criminal behaviour (and as seen with Arpaio, sometimes even openly defying judges is not a reason to be forced to quit).

In Germany, all members of parliament also get a pretty pension package - minimum of 1.682€ per month, which is FAR more than many old people ever get.

Politicians NEVER have to experience the worries of "normal people" like "how am I going to survive as a pensioner?", "how do I feed my kids when I don't have any money left?" or "how am I going to pay rent this month?" - and with a greater and greater rate of "working poor" or unemployed people, the disconnect will rise accordingly.

If being part of the 'establishment' means that you never had to worry about being fired, never had to worry about money, never had to worry about feeding your kids or paying rent -- then Trump is part of the establishment.

No, x -> y does not imply y -> x

Being rich doesn't automatically make you part of the establishment. Leaders of the establishment are often rich as a result of their connections, but the two things are not synonymous.

Coming as someone who lived through Reagan and both Bushes, I can state with a reasonable degree of certainty that you don't know how the world works, and you're about to get a lesson. I'm not even certain you understand how the government works, since it is going to be the Republican House and Senate who are going to be drafting and sending bills for him to sign.

Well I'm relieved to hear that at least someone among us knows exactly how the world works.

Reply on news.ycombinator.com