Can Trump be compares to the american founding fathers/firts presidents of the USA?

Not him but

Fine, if you must know I wanted Bernie to win. We need to end male WASP dominance by electing a Jew.

why are you impersonating me you fucking faggot

pathetic /pol/tard

Because your political ideology's only merit is its ability to be easily satirised.

Are you sure you're not talking about your own ideology?

If you want to know, I wanted Hillary to win (even if she is pretty terrible in her own right) and Im far from a SJW shouting against Trump.

>no u
Sick burn bro! #blacklivesmatter

The false flagging obsession you guys have would be the creepiest shit if you all weren't so bad at it.

As I said, nice black and white world /pol/fag

>Wealthy buisman
>Fed up of the system
>Leads a revolt
>Recieves foreign help (Nigel Farage)
>Eventually wins

He's literally George Washington reincarnated.

Jackson served in the military and was born poor

>waah i don't know the difference between mockery and false flags

>>Recieves foreign help (Nigel Farage)
I want this to become a Veeky Forums meme.

Because America hasn't fought a winning war in decades and Trump is smart enough to not get involved in losing projects.

Not sure why pacifist liberals think this is a good criticism of our president

>i wanted someone under investigation by the FBI for high treason to win because the other guy hurt my fee fees
Do you realise how retarded you sound to anybody who doesn't view immigration control as the second coming of Hitler?

Vietnam was a pretty pointless war, really. Just like Syria today.

Serving in the military doesn't mean you support going into war. And military service does implies you have served your country which Trump has done before and probably will never.

>He's literally George Washington reincarnated.

Washington was famous for being humble and honest. Trump is neither. Andrew Jackson is the only correct answer.

That was a response to the OP asking if Trump can be compared to the founding fathers. Stop projecting into everyone for a minute and maybe you'll learn to follow a conversation. I know it's hard without all the indents, usernames and scores to let you know what's important and who's talking to who, but really, you'll get used to it pretty quick.

To be fair I find him more comparable to Robespierre.

Figure head for a cultural revolution, gives rise to a new wave of political thought, rallies extremists, everyone thinks he's going to be the shit, back flips on his policies, won't meet anyone's expectations, will be publically humiliated, and will probably be replaced by another figure who'll be somewhat the opposite of him (politically), but the people will admire nonetheless.

True, but Jackson was also

1) Famous before running
2) Carried by popularity among the rednecks and uneducated people
3) Unpopular among Washington elites--very much so
4) Unpopular among politicians in his own party
5) Somewhat ignorant of the more complicated issues involved in governing (finance, constitutional law)

He also played fast and loose with the truth to bolster support and presided over an ugly and fact-light campaign.

I'm not trying to praise Trump or criticize Jackson by this comparison, but there are parallels.

Ultimately I think Trump will be a puppet for the Republican party, a continuation of Reagan-Bush, disappointing his anti-Establishment base and leading to a Sanderite revolution that will dominate American politics for decades to come (Supreme Court notwithstanding).

>2) Carried by popularity among the rednecks and uneducated people
>before they had the vote
hmm

Not remotely. He's a synthesis of Jackson and Reagan

Yes but I find those two differences the most important. All that points to Jackson being an actual man of the people (His only redeeming quality desu) and that is something Trump can never emulate no matter how much he pretends

Oh now that is just pathetic

If you honestly haven't been picking up the subtle similarities between todays political climate and the french revolution, you haven't been paying attention.

>disappointing his anti-Establishment base

I'm not even sure if it can be said that that's his base when he's been floating some ex-Bush administration folks and other assorted establishment politicians for his transition team and his supporters don't seem phased. I'd say his base is more anti-liberal, anti-Hillary.

>fed up of the system
>leads a revolt

hmm

Rednecks and uneducated people can still own property, retard. As long as they were white and own property, they had no other restrictions on voting.

More of America's Glided Age or post Great Depression...

Comparing him to Robesippre is an insult to Robesippre desu

Incorrect. By Jackson's time, the great majority of electors were chosen by statewide popular vote, quite similar to what we have today. Only a few states still had undemocratic barriers between the people and the electors.

Trump arguably is something of a man of the people. Despite what you've heard in the media, he wasn't mega rich in his early life, more like strong upper middle class. He has never been accepted by the elites (see Palm Beach, where he built his own country club because he wasn't accepted by Old Money there). Andrew Jackson was just as rich as Trump by the time he gained office anyway (a stretch but he was definitely wealthy).

True, many of the Republicans who voted for him were Romney-style, cut taxes "business as usual" Republicans who could give a damn about the working class beyond their vote. But the reason he won was unmoored jobless factory workers in the Midwest, and they won't be happy at all if this administration shapes up to be Reagan-Bush 3.0, as it will. Expect Republicans to drastically cut Trump's (non-military) spending efforts, pass liberal-style "immigration reform", etc. The real revolution is yet to come.

>he is not that rich!
Now that is just squabbling about the minor details. But yes Jackson is a self made man, something that Trump pretends to but will never be

Expanding on Trump as blue collar icon:

In his own words since the 80s, he has felt more of a connection with the working people than with the rich. He was embraced during his campaign by (minority) boxers and professional fighters, who love him.

Indeed, the future of America could be determined by a battle in Trump's soul: embrace the Republican elites who he only partially likes, or fight for the people on the street he says he likes. My suspicion is he will go with the latter. Very few people can taste power without inevitably serving it. Plenty of poor people go to law school and come out bourgeois as fuck.

True, but aren't self-made men some of the staunchest defenders of wealthy privilege? "I got mine, why can't you poor lazy fucks get yours?"

I'd say his base is more Pro-Trump than anything else.

Just a quick question, guys. I keep hearing "Trump works for the middle class little guy!" and I just have to know, does middle class mean working class in America? In Britain the working class are janitors, factory workers, cleaners, plumbers, that sort of thing. Middle class are doctors, small business owners, dentists etcetera and upper class are the nobility, which of these is the "middle class" in America?

Well Jackson certainly didn't think that during presidency. If anything self made man appreciate and understands the struggle the poor go through and be talented enough to overwhelm the odds

t. son of a self made man

In terms of personality, Jackson and Trump are a near-perfect match. The specific details don't matter.

We have the same system. Working class means blue collar, uneducated. Some skilled working class people make more money than white collar office workers, but are culturally distinct--more religious, more traditional, dislike blacks more, etc.

Middle class here really has two parts--upper and lower. Upper middle class are professionals and upper level management at firms. Lawyers, doctors, accountants, University professors, bankers, consultants, managers. Lower middle class are the lower level management, office people, government workers, teachers. Lower middle class aspire to be like the upper middle class. The upper portion of the upper middle class is the unfairly demonized "1%". They make 300k-400k+, a reasonable reward for a lifetime of work as a lawyer for instance who makes partner. The real enemy for socialists SHOULD be the 0.1% of the 1%.

Sorry for typing so much I'm high on adderall and trying to avoid studying for some exams tomorrow.

>he will go with the latter

I think you mean the former from what you said.

And in background they are wildly apart. You can't just ignore that.

Yes that's what I meant thanks for the correction

Anyone who reads this post please note this

Our middle class is between your working and middle I'd say

Right, so why do the media say "Is Donald the saviour of the middle class?!", Shouldn't they be asking if he's the saviour of the working class, the rural whites put out of work from their jobs going to China?

Most working class aren't rural whites though. Neither are most of Trump's supporters, they just happened to be the pivotal ones.

I haven't heard this said or seen it in context. Our media talk a lot more about the Don as the working class candidate. I have seen some articles pointing out the fact that overall Trump's voters are more middle class than working class. Trump really only won the WHITE working class, an indication that this election may be less Marxian than some hoped and more a continuation of the sad distraction of identity politics.

Generally the media is not very rigorous in its use of these terms though. Middle class in America just means "the people we like." One issue is that even the working class likes to think of itself as middle class. There's a lot of double-think in people's identifications.

>Middle class in America just means "the people we like."

This is honestly the key thing

He's already shaping up to be Jackson-tier.

>And in background they are wildly apart. You can't just ignore that

I can, because let's face it, it's hard to find anybody with a similar background to a guy who lives a tower named after himself. Jackson is the best you're going to get.

Because "middle class" in the contemporary vernacular has basically come to mean everything between "not in poverty" and "not making six figures", with "upper" and "lower" applied as nebulous quantifications.

wow

trump worship has reached new lows

Americans are not class conscious. That is their greatest accomplishment and greatest flaw.

It hasn't even begun.

/pol/ has a habit of overinflating completely worthless personalities

there was a period in 2014-2015 when they were promoting tila tequila, a washed up porn suffering from brain aneurysms as the queen of /pol/

That shows more about his ego than class. The Roosevelts are similar to him in class and Teddy in personality desu. Of coz their political leaning differ wildly

Nah, the zipper is our greatest accomplishment

And our greatest flaw.

No, because American founding fathers were leftists.

Read common sense.

Thomas Paine might have been a leftist (I haven't studied him so I can't comment but somehow I doubt it), but Washington, Jefferson, Adams, Hamilton, etc. definitely weren't. The American revolution was a bourgeois affair.

>The American revolution was a bourgeois affair.
Well, they would be considered as "proto" leftists. Also bourgeois revolution would be considered as leftist at their time

>is the president
>not serving his country

Uhhh nevermind the billions in taxes he has paid and the million of jobs he alone has made, but I guess sitting around in hearings all day is more important to some people

til owning a company to enrich yourself means serving your country because you pay taxes

>The American revolution was a bourgeois affair.
That's exactly why they're leftists. At the time the nobility were the ruling class.

Not even remotely.

I'm reading the Age of Jackson right now. The post-election slump of everyone in the Adams administration is palpably similar to how I felt on the election of Trump.

>billions in taxes he has paid
actually zero (0) for the last 23 years

Thats because they don't even realize it. noone pays attention and that includes trump supporters

This guy is wrong
Much of the American middle class has blue collar jobs, they aren't as good paying as they used to be, but many Americans have a middle class lifestyle with non-professional jobs, and trades and things of that sort.

Anything can be compared but in what way? Trump isn't a general or anything but he seems good in his own right.

>taking the bait

Why do you do this?

>didn't do anything so far
>fans claim he's comparable to the founding fathers
At least calm the fuck down and watch carefully what he does, my guess so far is that it will all end up as wasting 4 years of potential presidential influence. So far he has 0 concrete plans for the country, only humour and populist talent.

Anyway this belongs to I'm dumb for even replying.

Leftism and rightism always evolves senpai, specially if you consider the whole ''seating of the ancien régime of France'' thingy. The nobles held greater rights than the common people(including the bourgeois) at the time.

Trump is a mixture of Jackson and Nixon

>economic populist
>mixed record on individual rights, but not as conservative as he might seem
>many of his supporters are wary of muslims, mexicans, etc much like Jackson hated the Native Americans and Nixon ran on the southern strategy
>wants to pass libel laws to restrict criticism of the presidency
>oftentimes anti-intellectual, appeals to the "silent majority"

Is there anything else? I definitely agree with user's that Trump is a lot like Jackson, but I also feel he has quite a bit of Nixon in him

> Trump strongly, strongly resembles Andrew Jackson

So he's a man of short temperament, possessing mediocre ability and nothing in the course of his career has ever proved him having the qualities to govern a nation.

Which is horribly ironic because America much like the other Anglo nations is heavily class based society. Americans like to pretend class doesn't exist in the US that they are all equals despite class gap and inequality pervade daily life.

>short temperment

His short temper was a trick used to intimidate people. Behind closed doors he was apparently cool as a cucumber.

In wealth, yes.

Trump has much more in common with William Henry Harrison and Henry Clay than he does with Jackson.

>Trump is a mixture of Jackson and Nixon
I love Trump, but he's got a long way to go before he can hold a candle to either of those great men.

>Stupid Hicks are taken in by a slick, smooth city slicker.

It's like the old western snake oil dealers.

Trump literally can't be compared to anything; he's a first of his kind.

Think about it, a billionaire real-estate mogul and TV-host gets elected to president. It literally has no historical analog.

And tbqh, the problem was never Trump, the problem was Hillary. I mean, it's pretty insane to me that the Democrats couldn't find one(1) candidate that wasn't a sociopathic neo-con.

Berlusconi is Trump's equivalent. And he precede him.

>billionaire real-estate mogul and TV-host gets elected to president. It literally has no historical analog.

Berlusconi. Their politics are similar, too.

Sure, but I was talking about an American analog. Even Reagan(who was an actor), had been governor for almost 10 years before he became president.

>majority of white americans, college educated, or not are stupid hicks

>45% of college-educated women are "stupid hicks"

how can the people who were right about the outcome be more deluded than those who did not see it coming?

You're defining class exclusively in terms of income. I prefer to define it in terms of culture. We don't disagree.

Just keep in mind that the son of a welder who makes 100k a year has a different lifestyle than the son of a lawyer who makes 100k a year.

Same for accountant making 70k versus mechanic making that much

Income=/=class

100% more like