Bruce Springsteen is anti-Trump but predicts Trump re-election win in 2020

[LivingWordUnity]

Bruce Springsteen is anti-Trump but predicts Trump re-election with current challengers.

See the following article:

"The Democratic Party would do well to heed the advice of The Boss.

"In two different interviews, rocker Bruce Springsteen highlighted a big challenge for Democrats looking to unseat Donald Trump in 2020: a lack of connection to a broad swath of the American electorate. The man who once opened for John Kerry on the 2004 presidential campaign trail predicted the president would win re-election in two years — at least based on the current field of challengers." More

 

[GlabrousDory4]

There's no way Trump will win re-election. He's too old now and he's going to have his ego so bruised after 4 years that he won't have the guts to try it again. Meanwhile the GOP will have gotten a chance to x-ray the base and figure out how deeply held some rather unseemly attitudes really are within their voter base. This will give them a clearer path to get the stuff they want but they'll put someone up who is capable of actually implementing some of the less savory platforms.

This is why Ryan and some of the other young GOP guns are jumping ship (IMO). Ryan will be back in a few years once the Trump debacle has kind of faded. In the interim the GOP will take the findings from the Trump experiment and put someone in who can actually work the system.

 

[cow451]

When I am seeking insightful political analysis.... I listen to celebrities and rock stars......

Not exactly astonishing forecast....

 

[LivingWordUnity]

There's no way Trump will win re-election. He's too old now

 

[Allandavid]

Bruce Springsteen is anti-Trump but predicts Trump re-election with current challengers.

See the following article:

"The Democratic Party would do well to heed the advice of The Boss.

"In two different interviews, rocker Bruce Springsteen highlighted a big challenge for Democrats looking to unseat Donald Trump in 2020: a lack of connection to a broad swath of the American electorate. The man who once opened for John Kerry on the 2004 presidential campaign trail predicted the president would win re-election in two years — at least based on the current field of challengers." More

And we should care because.....??

 

[LivingWordUnity]

And we should care because.....??

If you don't care you don't have to participate in this thread.

 

[GoldenBoy89]

Bruce Springsteen is anti-Trump but predicts Trump re-election with current challengers.

See the following article:

"The Democratic Party would do well to heed the advice of The Boss.

"In two different interviews, rocker Bruce Springsteen highlighted a big challenge for Democrats looking to unseat Donald Trump in 2020: a lack of connection to a broad swath of the American electorate. The man who once opened for John Kerry on the 2004 presidential campaign trail predicted the president would win re-election in two years — at least based on the current field of challengers." More

I'm anti-Trump and I would probably have to agree with Bruce on this one.

 

[GlabrousDory4]

But Trump is weak and only in this game because people are looking at him. There's no real policy he believes in other than "Look at Donald!" so at his age he'd probably rather be spending his time polishing the gold in his bathroom. Or maybe being on a new reality TV show. Something where he isn't actually required to do anything. That's more his speed.

 

[GlabrousDory4]

If you don't care you don't have to participate in this thread.

I believe the point is "why should we care what Bruce Springsteen thinks?"

 

[Allandavid]

I believe the point is "why should we care what Bruce Springsteen thinks?"

Exactly...

 

[GoldenBoy89]

I believe the point is "why should we care what Bruce Springsteen thinks?"

Don't you know by now? Celebrity opinions are not wanted unless they agree with you or they can be used against the people you don't agree with.

 

[Ada Lovelace]

Don't you know by now? Celebrity opinions are not wanted unless they agree with you or they can be used against the people you don't agree with.

It requires no effort of imagination to know what the reaction would be if the title of this thread was "Bruce Springsteen said Donald Trump is "deeply damaged at his core, and dangerous," quoting the article in the OP. All we need to do is look at the derisive posts in threads about Bruce Springsteen characterizing Trump as a moron who has tragically taken siege of our democracy, or Meryl Streep and other celebrities criticizing Trump, rhetorically asking why anyone would care what a celebrity thought about him.

I actually do find what Springsteen said to be insightful; he is not a political analyst but he is someone who I believe has an understanding of the American psyche. He has working class roots, a son who choose to be a firefighter, an audience that spans across demographics, and writes songs that resonate with them. He's definitely right about Trump's wildly ironic "everyman" appeal to his base. I respect his thoughts but have no reason to agree with his assessment. In interviews prior to the 2016 election he adamantly insisted that there was absolutely no way Trump would be elected. He was unfortunately incorrect about that, and I believe he's incorrect about 2020 as well.

 

[Kaon]

Bruce Springsteen is anti-Trump but predicts Trump re-election with current challengers.

See the following article:

"The Democratic Party would do well to heed the advice of The Boss.

"In two different interviews, rocker Bruce Springsteen highlighted a big challenge for Democrats looking to unseat Donald Trump in 2020: a lack of connection to a broad swath of the American electorate. The man who once opened for John Kerry on the 2004 presidential campaign trail predicted the president would win re-election in two years — at least based on the current field of challengers." More

One may not like magic, but one may recognize a spell.

It is clear Trump will gain re-election in 2020. He is an excellent demagogue.

 

[GoldenBoy89]

It requires no effort of imagination to know what the reaction would be if the title of this thread was "Bruce Springsteen said Donald Trump is "deeply damaged at his core, and dangerous," quoting the article in the OP. All we need to do is look at the derisive posts in threads about Bruce Springsteen characterizing Trump as a moron who has tragically taken siege of our democracy, or Meryl Streep and other celebrities criticizing Trump, rhetorically asking why anyone would care what a celebrity thought about him.

I actually do find what Springsteen said to be insightful; he is not a political analyst but he is someone who I believe has an understanding of the American psyche. He has working class roots, a son who choose to be a firefighter, an audience that spans across demographics, and writes songs that resonate with them. He's definitely right about Trump's wildly ironic "everyman" appeal to his base. I respect his thoughts but have no reason to agree with his assessment. In interviews prior to the 2016 election he adamantly insisted that there was absolutely no way Trump would be elected. He was unfortunately incorrect about that, and I believe he's incorrect about 2020 as well.

I really hope you are right about that and that Springsteen is wrong but I think like you say, he seems to have a good beat on what a wide array of people might be thinking by just the circumstances of who he is and what he does.

I think I have gotten to a point where I'd rather expect things to go wrong just so I can be pleasantly surprised when things actually work out alright. I don't honestly know how sure it is that Trump will be reelected in 2020 but I'd rather mentally prepare myself for it now so it doesn't hit me quite so hard if or when we see, once again, that the country isn't quite where we thought it was socially or politically. I'm sorry if that makes me seem pessimistic. I'm not trying to bring anybody down but I can't shake the feeling that we just aren't done yet with this whole fiasco. Having a candidate come out within the next year or so who can pull enough people together to send Trump packing back to Manhattan just does not seem very realistic to me at this time but I'll be happy to be proven wrong about that.

To the point of celebrities giving their opinions on politics (or anything, really) I think it's pretty funny how often we hear people speak out against Hollywood celebs voicing themselves on matters that are important to them when they literally just elected a celebrity president who, for the last several years and even longer has been giving his unsolicited (and more often ill-informed) opinions on literally anything that has happened as far as politics. I always have to wonder if they're doing it on purpose to pull our leg or if they just honestly don't realize the hypocrisy of it all.

 

[Kaon]

I always have to wonder if they're doing it on purpose to pull our leg or if they just honestly don't realize the hypocrisy of it all.

Likely its both. Celebrities aren't as free as us plebs; they have handlers. Those handlers tell them how to act, what to say, when to do press, what brands to endorse, etc. Those handlers also have handlers - namely, corporate executives.

Those same corporate executives have their own ideas and agendas that can significantly influence their world sphere - given their resources. In general, those executives don't care which way the vote happens, because either way they thrive and make money; that is the point of (global) capitalism.

It is a similar process to how defense contractors don't really care the outcome or morality of a war so long as their weapons are being sold (often to all sides).

 

[Aryeh Jay]

When I am seeking insightful political analysis.... I listen to celebrities and rock stars......

Not exactly astonishing forecast....

Kid Rock, Eminem, and Lady Gaga have been influencing my vote ever since William Shatner, Ted “I pooped myself” Nugent, and David Hasselhoff’s music career tanked.

 

[ThatRobGuy]

There's no way Trump will win re-election. He's too old now and he's going to have his ego so bruised after 4 years that he won't have the guts to try it again.

I think you greatly underestimate the cult-like following he has among a substantial portion of his support base.

 

[super animator]

I think you greatly underestimate the cult-like following he has among a substantial portion of his support base.

I don't think that alone is the deciding factor of the 2016 elections. It depends on the candidate that the Democrats picked.

 

[ThatRobGuy]

I don't think that alone is the deciding factor of the 2016 elections. It depends on the candidate that the Democrats picked.

I don't think it does...here's why. The outrage toward specific democrats is precisely because of the propaganda-machine that was promoting Trump.

So, the Democrats could pick the most squeaky clean "Joe Perfect" candidate, and all it would take was Breitbart, InfoWars, and Fox to start releasing nonsensical stories about them having people killed, them secretly funding "globalist agendas", or pedophile rings in the backs of pizza shops, etc... and by election time, they'd be saying the same thing "well, even though Trump isn't my favorite, but he's certainly the lesser of two evils. Joe Perfect is the evil incarnate!!!"

 

[super animator]

Rob, I couldn't disagree more on this.
She did worse then Obama when it comes to minorities.
What really happened in 2016, in 7 charts

I don't think it does...here's why. The outrage toward specific democrats is precisely because of the propaganda-machine that was promoting Trump.

Are you going to ignore the propaganda-machine that was promoting Hillary? I literally seen it first hand in r/politics.
Regardless you can't ignore the negative press that trump have received throughout the 2016 election and throughout the presidency. If we going to detect losers based on negative press that a person receives then trump should have loss long ago.

So, the Democrats could pick the most squeaky clean "Joe Perfect" candidate, and all it would take was Breitbart, InfoWars, and Fox to start releasing nonsensical stories about them having people killed, them secretly funding "globalist agendas", or pedophile rings in the backs of pizza shops, etc...

They said all sorts of nonsense regarding Obama(remember the birthism?) That doesn't stop him from wining the presidency twice.

and by election time, they'd be saying the same thing "well, even though Trump isn't my favorite, but he's certainly the lesser of two evils. Joe Perfect is the evil incarnate!!!"

That is the result of the first pass voting system, not some grand conspiracy media here.