So Tulsi Gabbard is back causing a big commotion in the mainstream media again. Many of them along with the usual gang-of-idiots in the war cheerleaders party are all up in arms about her "meeting a monster" because she deemed it not beneath her to meet with Syrian Pres. Bashar Al-Assad in her attempt to sow peace in a war ravaged country. It is funny to watch her supposed left-wing or at least "centrist" detractors so openly out themselves as irrational and immoral sycophants of the pro-war agenda. It is almost like they cannot see their credibility with the left vanishing into nothingness as they speak their childishly self-incriminating propaganda.
Tulsi is going to become a major target of their propaganda, she is becoming more and more, now it will be more harsh. But I am afraid it is too late for all that jazzhands. She is too smart for that and has too much credibility for the mud-slinging to work. Because like Donald J. Trump, she has a ton of support online - and the only people who take the mainstream media seriously are really not in the mood anymore for more saber rattling demagogic mud-slinging from boorishly pretentious media types and their deemed experts. I think most everyone is sick of their obviously sold-out-to-special-interests inane babble-rousing.
Meanwhile back in the the endless new world of Trump 24/7: As he is busy taking over Washington it seems that those progressives who during the election season were somewhat hopeful of a Trump presidency if for nothing more than what he was saying about foreign policy and jobs, it seems some are still holding out some hope on those fronts. I fear that hope is lost. I hope I am wrong, but...
Trump is for good relations with Russia more than likely because he and his friends are interested in a peaceful situation in general, everywhere, so they can live at peace and easily make more money anywhere in the world without fear or consequences. As a wealthy businessman that is probably how he has looked at US foreign policy, just like Rockefeller Oil's CEO Rex Tillerson, his Sec of State choice. But the reality of the official US foreign policy in strong opposition to that view towards Russia likely will change Trump. Trump, as much as progressives want him to be like them in foreign policy views, probably doesn't see foreign policy through a progressive worldview. He likely sees it in terms of business and pleasure, i.e., it is bad for business and pleasure to have bad relations with Russia since they are such a powerful and important country, so why go back to the cold war era?
Trump will have the riot act read to him by the establishment on why they are intent on creating a cold war with Putin's Russia, i.e., Russia under Putin does not play ball with the Anglo-Euro-Asian establishment. That economic and security bloc may agree to disagree wherever they may disagree on many matters (e.g. European Union problems, economic agendas, and so on), but they agree to at least follow certain major agendas which Russia has not gone along with, i.e., Russia has friendly relations with Iran and the Alawite Syrian regime; they want Ukraine in their orbit or at least the Russian half; they go along with a new reserve currency regime for the world which would harm the current Dollar regime; and the general disregard to aligning themselves with the Anglo-Euro-Asian establishment on future matters along with their support of anti-establishment media in the west. Add to that the wealthy Russians that oppose Putin for the taking of their wealth and power and future opportunities for wealth and power (control over natural resources, etc.) in partnerships with non-Russians - and any peaceful climate for business with Russia has been put on the back burner until they can get what they want from Russia - cooperation instead of antagonistic competition.
Trump was, I believe, unaware of that agenda, thinking that it was simply foolish to have bad relations with Russia for no good reason. I believe Trump will likely cease with his "let's be friends with Russia" campaign rhetoric when he becomes appraised of the situation. If he already knows but doesn't care, I doubt he will be supported by the GOP as much as they are now
Trump may have said the right things about bringing manufacturing back to America, but even if he pulls that off to a small degree (it will take many years) and doesn't get thrown out of office before it really makes much of a difference, the reality of those jobs will not be the pie in the sky that his supporters think - simply because the unions have been decimated. The high wage manufacturing jobs will become the low wage manufacturing jobs. That is the only way those jobs will come back because Trump has not shown a pro-union past nor has he been a supporter of high minimum wages. I don't see a near future with high paying manufacturing jobs in America making enough sense for most businesses to stay or come back regardless of what Trump says he will do to them on import taxes. Either way they would have to raise prices so they might as well stay in Asia or Latin America. Something will not work - either they won't come back or those that do will pay low wages.
So those are the two main reasons the progressives who support Trump see a silver lining in his otherwise typical lower taxes, government privatization, more military spending, smaller government rhetoric - which is aligned with the usual GOP nexus of interests.
A lot of people were led into thinking that Trump was not part of the right-wing establishment because most of that establishment was vocally against his candidacy. But they were only against him because it seemed like a safe bet to put out a politically correct public view of themselves during the election year. They thought the pollsters were right and that Clinton would win. So they saw an opportunity for public relations, to make themselves seem smart to put Trump down in the same way that Trump's political opposition and media was putting him down, i.e., as an unschooled churlish demagogue who was making a fool of himself. But since Trump has won they have embraced him thinking that he will come around and get in line with the establishment consensus on foreign policy - and more importantly support the extreme GOP agenda that has been smacked down by Obama for 8 years.
It remains to be seen what Trump does, but right now it looks like he is ready to install the full GOP agenda. So why did he get rid of the TTP? Isn't that progressive? It was already finished due to such massive public ill will, and it was part of Obama's legacy. It was bad for Trump's image to support it even if he supports the same type of corporate ideology. The same type of thing can be accomplished with Trump's administration getting the glory in the future.
When some people or even progressives tell us "the reason Trump has all these high powered corporate guys in his cabinet is because Trump wants strong people to push his agenda in Washington," well, I believe that is correct. But I disagree with the view that Trump's agenda aligns with the common people. Since when in his history has Trump ever sided with the common people except in his campaign rhetoric? His past suggests the usual corporate capitalist, not a progressive. So unless Trump was visited by the ghosts from Christmas past, present, and yet to come - then I would not get your hopes up over a sudden radical departure from his past. He has never done anything in his past to suggest anything but a typical GOP agenda other than what he has said in his campaign - which if he is like other politicians - doesn't mean a whole lot when it comes to what they end up doing in office.
If Trump does surprise us and is the radical or secret progressive many hope he is, then he will be gone in 4 years or less. The establishment is not something he has the will or the way to take on. That can be accomplished but it would take someone with the majority of the nation behind them, Trump simply doesn't have that kind of support. The majority of the nation are distracted and not overly educated on most issues, making them easily manipulated by the mainstream media and their so-called experts. It would take someone like a Tulsi Gabbard or other truly progressive and smart person to shame them into submission. Because that is what it will take, someone on the moral high ground that the media cannot demonize effectively.