Blame the Elites for the Trump Phenomenon

The elites of both parties have expressed contempt for Donald Trump, and Trump has succeeded in part by channeling his voters’ contempt for the elites. Does support for Trump reflect an uninformed populism and misplaced anger by a large swath of the American electorate? Or have the elites failed to empathize with their struggles, and failed to craft effective policies to help them cope?
FOR THE MOTION:
Timothy Carney, Senior Political Columnist, Washington Examiner & Visiting Fellow, AEI
Ben Domenech, Publisher, The Federalist & Host, The Federalist Radio Hour
AGAINST THE MOTION:
Jennifer Rubin, Author, The Washington Post’s “Right Turn” Blog
Bret Stephens, Deputy Editor, Editorial Page and “Global View” columnist, The Wall Street Journal
MODERATOR: John Donvan
===================================
Subscribe: / @opentodebateorg
Official site: opentodebate.org/
Open to Debate Twitter: / opentodebateorg
Open to Debate Facebook: / beopentodebate
===================================

[@trifacto]

The people arguing it's NOT the Elites fault, convinced me it's the Elites fault.

[@peterthegreat996]

yep...smug sobs...their day is coming

[@HannesRadke]

Wow, Mrs. Rubin really shot her own team in the head. The confused faces after her opening speech XD

[@colinthomson5358]

My god she was so horrible. Her attitude was awful. "Let the peasants eat cake then!"

[@effiedeia1850]

Rubin's voice was smackingly irritating. She seemed to have fairly strong arguments in favour of the motion. Then claimed what she was saying was in the opposite. Frustrating.

[@davidcreque9411]

+Colin Thomson p88

[@Siddhartha02]

A room full of anti trump elites discussing the trump phenomena, this will surely be enlightening.

[@edpiv2233]

Lol

[@dylanlan5552]

You don't need to support Nazi to find out how they came into being.

[@myview65]

I so agree

[@outlawJosieFox]

Why ? Don't you think that normal people are sitting around in bars and discussing the very same question ? Are you saying that educated people have no right to discuss how Trump came from nowhere and high jacked the election ?

[@GonzoTehGreat]

@@outlawJosieFox I think you've missed his point, which is that's it's unlikely that with their obvious biases these speakers can offer much insight into why Donald Trump became a presidential candidate, much less how he won the election! It's a bit like ask Economists about the state of the economy in 2007...or if you prefer, a room full of white people discussing the causes of racism.

[@colinthomson5358]

My god she was so horrible. Her attitude was awful. "Let the peasants eat cake then!"

[@thinkmackay8954]

Other than brainwashing propaganda, I do not believe Rubin read more than two books her whole life. She is no more intelligent than a talking bird.

[@colinthomson5358]

"Are facts racist?"* Also about the stats she brought up about Trump voters, ok so the average wage might be high but isn't American debt so massive that it is 5 or 10 times greater than any increase in wages? (over the past 40 years) Making 100'000 a year means nothing if bread is $100 a slice and beans $20 a tin. I have to bring it up (because she sure did!) but I also don't see her calling Israel racist for building a wall/not taking in refugees. I will never understand why Jewish people are so happy about the immigration of folk who despise them. *This new comment system isn't allowing me to reply directly to you for some reason?

[@thinkmackay8954]

Colin Thomson I did get to read your words and agree with what you said and more. There is no place in the world who has imported more than a few Muslim and benefited from doing so. Obama has an agenda and Hillary has not a cell in her that wants to better the USA or its people. Trump is not a monster in any shape or form, proud and not a smooth politician he may be, but he is not a monster as those panelists described him. It is obscene that we the little people can understand what is good for our country and us but those brainwashed mouth pieces have no clue.

[@Siddhartha02]

Wow. This Jennifer Rubin character is coming of as a sociopath of the highest order.

[@InorganicVegan]

Yeah, I have rarely met jews who aren't super sensitive about their jew status, and I live in Brooklyn! We get it, Jennifer, you're a jew and everyone is antisemitic. Fuck her.

[@smithjones1906]

Did you happen across any of her flailing anti-Rand Paul propaganda during the primaries? This lady wouldn't know objectivity if it slapped her in the face, which I hope it does.

[@fitnessbusinesssuccess7177]

I think the funniest part is when both of them AGREED that 25% of the nation is irredeemable and then they went on to say "Go travel America, it rocks, we're awesome!!!!" So 1 in 4=irredeemable, but America is awesome.....

[@thrashertm]

I'm Jewish and despise her. She's one of my fav. reads, as the comments on her blog are so critical of her. Lolz

[@gefiltefisherman5396]

Rubin thinks Jews are the Master Race.

[@mavericktheace]

This debate answers itself. The side against the motion are so caught up on hating Trump and his supporters that they blind themselves to the appeal that has driven his campaign. They think there's no way "their side" could be responsible for something so abhorrent as Trump.

[@Khannea]

This presentation has some of the hallmarks as a bunch of inner-sanctum vatican catholic clergy discussing this odd phenomenon of two girls and one cup.

[@mhtinla]

Two girls and a cup? Don't know what you're talking about, but I like the sound of it. ;-)

[@Neeboopsh]

awesome.

[@agentsmidt3209]

The MSM says Trump has _0%_ support from African Americans according to some "poll". I swear if this is not the twilight zone then I'd claim we are neck deep in a 1984-esque world. Remember all those conspiracy people that you used to call nutjobs?...they are starting to sound credible now aren't they?hell Alex Jones with his Lizard people conspiracies sounds more credible and sincere than our "cherished" "intellecuals".

[@Neeboopsh]

+Agent Smidt : i saw one poll with 0% afr am. sample size of that demographic: 29. not exactly a good sample size. and i am unaware of the methodology for selection, could be all of the 29 were black democrats, which might preclude a support response entirely. but it fits a narrative so it seems to be the one cited.

[@Khannea]

Postop or preop? Preop is HOT. Postop myself.

[@aegilmoth]

The woman debtor had an awful slurping sound when she talked.

[@joshe9215]

Made me nauseous.

[@DKFX1]

Totally!

[@mintoo2cool]

slimy ... wish they would have edited that awful sound out.

[@DamnThatsFunny308]

that's like saying is rain responsible for mudslides. They rained on the heads of the American people for so long and now it's crashing down on their heads

[@cindypruitt9534]

Agreed!

[@susandunnington5684]

I have a great idea: Let's fill the stage, and the room, with elites and we'll discuss why it's not our fault. My word, no wonder the United States is in trouble.

[@jjbees7911]

Elites arguing with elites and an audience of elites.

[@n3bie]

Anybody watching this debate in 2017 and shaking their head every time one of the panelists said it was impossible for Trump to win?

[@shelbykate6195]

YetiShaman Stephens and Smacky were unbearable. At least Carney and Dominch get it.

[@em4475]

YetiShaman I’m watching in 2020 and boy it gets worse

[@NeoSaturos123]

Well they were right. It was impossible for Trump to win and he didn't. Hillary Clinton won. But because the support for her was too concentrated, not spread throughout the country, her victory by 2 million votes was useless and ignored in the USA's screwed up 18th century presidential elections system.

[@garthpilkey5965]

@@NeoSaturos123 I recommend you honestly educate yourself on the US election system for the President.

[@StrongButAwkward]

"And in their desperation they turned to a man they didn't fully understand" Someone liked the Dark Knight am I right?

[@nevadataylor]

Thomas Piketty and a recent Princeton study; both have already proven that the rich elite make the rules, and its pretty hard for them not to be at fault if they are making the rules.

[@kathykelly5930]

so according to Bret, Sean Hannity isn't an elite, but someone with a gender studies degree who likes white whine is.

[@ianyboo]

does it drive anybody else nuts when you can hear in Exquisite detail the saliva making little noises in a person's mouth? ahhhh first world problems... :)

[@avip8539]

Ugh.

[@LittleMissTui]

Yuck

[@bert8063]

this time I found myself skipping a quarter of the arguments... a felt my sanity evaporating faster then her saliva

[@xinyue535]

You make me pay more attention to that and now I'm going crazy

[@ianyboo]

Xin Yue haha! Everybody must feel my pain :-)

[@tonyhart904]

It's essentially a debate between two groups of people who have no understanding of why anyone would actually vote for Trump, and presupposing that there are only failures and bad decisions behind his nomination. People don't believe he can fix everything. People don't agree with the things he says. People don't even believe he believes the things he says. People want to vote for Donald Trump for the same reasons the British public voted in the Liberal Democrats and for Brexit: "Yeah, we'll lose - but you'll lose more." They don't care if they get mortally wounded, so long as the architects of their current suffering are made to bleed.

[@MrTruthsforme]

If the people who voted for 'brexit' thought they could make elites suffer more than themselves, then they have another thing coming. I have no doubt that the elites would be pissed when things don't go their way, but they'll be fine. Us regular folks, though...

[@pierren___]

Excellent speech. They talk to us like we re children who cant think by themselves for f sake

[@petrs65]

Jennifer's shocking honesty demonstrating her elitism, arrogance, living in the bubble syndrome, her constant repetition of empty lines, non-existing capability to understand anyone's view is the best demonstration how "the elites" and their followers look like and why people voted as they did. Yes she does represent her "class" can the argument rather well. (although her chance to win any debate is rather minimal)

[@TNM001]

what a cheap shot at the beginning by telling the audience "if you vote yes, its your fault"... And the audience? applauding like crazy. So, point proven...

[@vanillaguerilla5250]

Typical Elite b.s.

[@larutouchiha6208]

I'm Nigerian, I don't get why thinking Obama was born in Kenya is racist. I'm still trying to figure it out. Trump wouldn't be upset if he was suspected of being born in Germany.

[@BM-wh5qk]

Because white liberals think everyone who didn't kiss Obama's butt is racist.

[@guyfromthe80s92]

I'm having a problem not despising the debaters against the motion. Bret Stephens was unpleasant and toxic, Jennifer was boring and frivolous. This is the first time I have ever downvoted IntelligenceSquared Debates.

[@JDishman]

I thought Jennifer was outright rude at several points. Both of them were just awful. I wonder how much of a factor that was for the results. I also had to roll my eyes when John Donvan made the point about how civil the debate was. The "for" side was much more civil, while Jennifer and Bret were just insulting and smug.

[@GonzoTehGreat]

I agree. This was a poor debate overall, partly because of a badly worded motion and partly because the "Against" side had mostly weak arguments. Having said that I think they had a much tougher position to argue and Bret did make some good points (e.g. 54:23)

[@trollaccount7726]

Something about this feels tone death by those debating it and those in the audience

[@colouredrahman]

I love IQ2. But too many times in which I watch a very intriguing debate, the debaters are debating completely different points which could easily be remedied by defining the terms in the motion. For instance in this debate one team is debating that the "Political Elite" are responsible while the other team is debating against "The American Elite" are for Trump. Two very different points which makes the idea for voting for who proved or disproved the motion since they are making completely different points.

[@EmbraceTradition316]

The against the motion team was terribly unintelligible and used emotionally charged arguments for everything. Really not liking this debate.

[@amandagriffin1751]

Omg that smacking noise of the lady's mouth makes me gag. Her ideas are even worse somehow.

[@shelbykate6195]

I had to fast forward through smacky Mcsmuggy.

[@MRCKify]

Who?

[@bernardscheidle5679]

Never underestimate the sharpness of the pitchfork and the guillotine, in the hands of the angry mob in the street.

[@rg7535]

Brett Stevens' arrogance gave Trump a few more votes in the general election.

[@emotionscomeandgo]

All of these idiots dont understand reality. They have lost their minds in sheer hatred

[@thewalloftrump1708]

I still do not see how questioning someone's birth place is racist. He did live in several countries.

[@candycatlara536]

If I was an American, I would vote for Trump. I am a migrant and have been a left wing voter for 14 years.

[@snorkelfish]

If she would've stopped smacking her lips she may have been able to finish her final statement.

[@nihilozero]

I'm surprised the "for" team won because they basically allowed "the elite" to be defined as the upper middle class or people who have had some material success in modern America. Although they won, I believe that they should have made it much more clear that present audience was not actually the elite. Most of the people in that audience, despite their wealth and academic success, are probably not shaping policy and public opinion at the highest levels. Perhaps it pleases them to think otherwise, but they're really just affluent people who happen to have personally benefited from the system in place.

[@GonzoTehGreat]

I agree. The wording of the motion was flawed, which is embarrassing considered the organisers call themselves "Intelligence Squared" because this particular debate wasn't particularly smart! They could've fixed this with the insertion of a single word: "political". Both sides can agree whom the political elites are so they can move on to debate if they're responsibile. It also avoids the kinda of appeal to the audience tried by Bret Stephens.

[@lucianavieira2576]

@@GonzoTehGreat the elite is not just the 1%. It is also an intellectual concept. Your father is an engineer and you go to Georgetown University, for example. You live in a nice neighborhood in DC.

[@GonzoTehGreat]

@@lucianavieira2576 The 1% is not an intellectual concept. It originates from the grossly unequal wealth distribution in both the USA and the world. Your example doesn't identify a demographic but even if it did, it casts the net too wide for the purposes of this debate. The motion under debate must be clearly defined so both sides understand their positions, otherwise they will argue against straw men.

[@twelvecatsinatrenchcoat]

I think this is part of the problem. I think you'd be surprised who "shapes policy at the highest levels." The against side had one good point the entire debate and it was: Using the word "elite" to arbitrarily clump together amorphous swathes of people you don't like isn't an actual argument. It's just one more way to create an Other and blame it for all your problems. If the people in that room work at think tanks, financial institutions and as middling advisors in political movements -- which they probably do in NYC, they are a part of what creates public policy an American. It's very complicated how the sausage gets made, it's not just George Bush in his office pulling levers under his desk. Blaming some imagined "elite" is a vast oversimplification that doesn't get to the problem. It's just demagoguery that's fueled by bigotry and racism. That's the only good point the against side had, and it would've won the room if they'd actually focused on it.

[@apetroae1]

TRUMP PHENOMENON !!!!!!

[@bobofatlantis671]

This is tough to watch. These people are all completely out of touch with reality.

[@VeracityMedia]

I'm sure Mrs Rubin asked if the debate would be moderated under "safe space" rules before hand.

[@pavelbrodskiy7216]

She's Jewish. They promote each other to powerful positions.

[@kemwittalltree9650]

Let them eat cake!

[@JohnDoe-wy1yd]

These people have too much time on their hands from not having a real job. They don't build the cars they drive, the homes they live in or grow the food they eat but they sure do consume a lot. They could fall of the face of the earth tomorrow and nothing would change.

[@byakugan2173]

The people in the audience asking questions seem more informed and in touch with reality that panelists on both sides.

[@jjbees7911]

the private companies and bankers that caused 2008 need more accountability a hole.

[@494Ibrahim]

that spitty noise the lady kept on making when she was talking was really distracting.

[@bnpixie1990]

god damn. listen to rubin talk with headphones on is driving me crazy! i hear every single swish of her tongue and pressing together of her lips.

[@ivanandreevich8568]

I can't believe a debate like this can take place without speaking about social justice warriors and political correctness AT LENGTH. People are legitimately fucking sick of that Marxist garbage.

[@qwasyx3]

Did anyone else get distracted and pissed off by Jennifers mouth noises?

[@rollotwomassey]

@51:36...why is Rubin still talking about Catholics like it's 1950 and they're A] actually observant and B] can be relied upon to bloc vote? That's an electorally useless demographic to measure; the vote is too divided to be useful as a meaningful metric. Plenty of Catholics voted for Trump [45%] vs 48% for Clinton.

[@George50809]

Well, he is a whole lot better than what we have now.

[@mrbriscoe2001]

jennifer Rubin is so smug she' s loathsome.

[@Bogsyism]

jennifer Ruben? Now there's a jew name for you. she will know all about elites. she comes from a tribe of elites

[@thinkmackay8954]

And they are the worst kind of elites, if there are any good ones.

[@LISA75_]

what is wrong with this womans tongue? i couldn't listen to her speak the strange wet glue sounds were making me cringe.

[@user-rc2xs5ti2w]

He is sure a phenomenon.

[@danielrosic2960]

Funny to finally see John Donvan in the flesh. I listen to these in podcast form. I see the British IQ2 on youtube but I guess I've never come across an American episode on here.

[@wayneronnie7402]

We love Trump here in the UK we are hoping and praying for November.

[@JustinArnhikes]

Carney and Domenech did quite well and I believe, won this debate handily.

[@urinetrouble4999]

Ben Domenech spoke so well that I'm going to check out the federalist.

[@gregmcintosh1563]

This is worth listening to, no matter who you are supporting.

[@TheHandsomeMatt]

Just stop having Jennifer Rubin on... She brings nothing good to the table.

[@vaibhavnandwana97]

I love IQ2 but this is the dumbest debate, I have ever seen .

[@Miss.Anthropic.]

Rubin voice is like nails on a chalk board

[@TheDriftingsmoke]

i can't unhear her tongue and spit sloshing around in her mouth when she speaks my god

[@urinetrouble4999]

came looking for these comments. she makes me want to stop watching. I have headphones on and it feels like she is licking the inside of my ear.

[@JustinArnhikes]

Luan Nguyen Stop it... Stop it please.... I just can't stop hearing this....:p

[@SydneyWu]

I think she has some speech impediment. She can't control her salivation.

[@existentialhangover1124]

The elite asking the elite if they're to blame? No, this isn't biased!

[@FoodLiquorCool]

Live4Harmonie ...well the motion did win....

[@bedazzlejuju]

You cannot know how deep the disregard and disrespect of "the nice business man from Utah" really is unless you were once Mormon and no longer are. Krugman was close to the mark. I will agree that we cannot quite equivocate Trump with Romney.

[@delaplanemusic]

The for position allowed the against to frame this entire debate on unbelievably dishonest terms. The first speaker claims that the audience are the "elites" because of the wine they drink, their education, the fact that they had been to Europe, and their zip code. The for speakers should have asked the audience how many of them had been pulled over with drugs and a prostitute in the back of their limo and gotten off scott free. Or how many of them were made board members of major corporations because of their fathers connections. Or if they have ever beaten their wife to a pulp and had the cops help them keep the story out of the newspapers.

[@TheOnceAndFutureDoug]

Here we are debating who's to blame with Trump and right out of the gate two knocks at millennials. Despite the fact that if you ask us (I'm in my early 30's so I qualify) the majority of us outright detest the man and a 2/3 majority refuse to vote for him. But no, let's continue to poke fun at millennials.

[@sahm7899]

Rubin & Stevens. So smug

[@overcamehim]

Good luck holding bureaucrats accountable. Their unions protect them very well. There is plenty of sin to go around. We all need to stop blaming and accept responsibility and be accountable for our own actions.

[@carolcheny]

I stumbled into this video several weeks after the debate, and these people all look like fools. "He can't win." OK. Unintelligent, squared. Hilarious.

[@Applecorecafe]

Elites of idiocy and nothing more. They have destroyed humanity with money.

[@September2004]

Why can't the answer be a combination of both the elites and certain voters? HRC said accurately but unwisely that half of Trump's voters are 'deplorables'. But Michael Moore said that not all of Trump's voters are racists, they're people who are desperate. So one half likes Trump's racism and doesn't mind his sexism, and the other are desperate people who see HRC as too Wall Street.

[@AwakeningMindHeart]

There is great disappointment with the political system, especially among segments of the citizenry that have been central to U.S. culture and which have been economically stagnant not just due to historical social-technological shifts and a long-term, but also due to long-standing, big corporate influence over the political system. They are those who now feel left out. And they want to rebel! And they want to believe! And they need hope! They need someone that speaks for them in a plain style with which they can relate. And they can be misled and convinced through the right sales pitch; just the right presentation. And making promises and appearing different and promising is not that difficult. These and other segments of the population want someone new; someone they can believe in. Thus 'outsiders' like Sanders and Trump can happen; Sanders attracting the future-oriented but worried millenials and postmodern progressives and Trump the more past-oriented traditionals and nativists. On the good side, there's one side looking to the future in order to change things and there's another looking to aspects of the past that indeed need saving. And both are partially correct. But, it seems to me that, while one would work within the spirit of the original constitutional system and definitely is not an aspiring dictator (even if associated with the term "socialism" which has often been associated with dictators), I can't help but think that the other, DT, would unconstitutionally dictate his own personal bombastic will, continuously explaining away his failures by blaming others; demanding full obedience and support while continuously enamoring those that would not benefit from his political and economic measures. A charismatic man that rules by an all-or-nothing allegiance is dangerously divisive and can render governing less manageable or even unmanageable. This is why he should lose the current 2016 presidential election by a substantial margin so that his movement doesn't continue as an obstacle to peace and finding solutions. And there already is to be noted this divisive tendency and peril arising in other parts of the world. Dictators and dictator-aspirants are taking over many parts of the world. The idea that "the system is rigged" is - in fact - a talking point exploited by authoritarian hopefuls and current autocrats all over the world. Nothing new. And these individuals are now springing up again in many places that have had established representative democracies (for instance, Hungary, Poland, France, Russia, Italy, Venezuela, The Philippines and others). Clearly ,as David Cay Johnston said about D. Trump "he talks as a dictator." He has said many things that he will "fix" basically overlooking or demeaning checks and balances. However, what we need is not to overlook checks and balances but to craft a much more functional problem-solving democracy; however not through a dictator's whims. Perhaps the "DT Phenomenon" will be instrumental in stimulating greater awareness of the need to update representative democracy. Nonetheless, I hope that this is not done through a major crisis that may even lead to a regression towards a pre-democratic state of affairs. Because it has become obvious that an autocrat can be elected through popular vote in the U.S., this means that the U.S. is not internally safe while functioning under its current system. But it has to be changed in a healthy way by greater awareness and agreement from within strengthening a connective way of thinking and mutual recognition, rather than the downward spiral of unending dichotomous doctrinal blaming. Most Americans haven't experienced how Democracy itself is high jacked by a demagogues through elections. Most may erroneously think that if someone is elected, then Democracy is safe. But the "hijacking" has happened in other semi-established and even well- established western democratic countries and the recurrent tendency is once again (in an era of competing values, greater complexity and rising infotainment) on the rise. Moreover, the rise seems to cater to a zeal for nativist, isolationist, new fascist forms of government. To counter-up this citizens need to learn to think integratively to catch up and to function in a complex world system. It doesn't matter whether the overtaking of Democracy by using democratic processes is done by right-wing or left-wing charismatics. It can happen, has happened, is happening; endangers the continuity of civilization, its gains in emancipatory freedoms and rights, the overall reduction of violence occurring over centuries as Steve Pinker has pointed out and it diminishes the quality of rational and civil human life. Besides many Middle Eastern, African and Oriental countries that still have to stabilize within serious levels of democracy under their own cultural contexts, too many of them already with older, established democracies are being overtaken or are close to being overtaken by charismatic demagogues. Instead of leading the international order into more intelligent forms of cooperation and an integration that doesn't extinguish local contexts these retrograde political forces are excessively atomizing. They form around democracy manipulators. These democracy manipulators offering skewed, doctrinal, emotionally-ladden and locally-resonant solutions in a time when we need a more rational, wholesome, altruistic figure heads chosen by a genuinely educated public; a time in which both must be able to responsibly perceive vaster swaths of the whole picture overcoming the tribalistic tendencies of hunter-gathering and more animalistic eras. But the U.S. shouldn't fall for this now already "classical" manipulation! It is quite serious and dangerous! By using democratic procedures and speaking to the disaffected and their frustrations; by selling a comforting narrative and a desirable image that looks suitable, the authoritarian demagogue will then move on to really entrench himself within the system and rig it even but under his own style, dangerously eroding Democracy worse and/or in conjunction with how elite interests were doing before. But the U.S. really should not and must not fall for it. In spite of its foibles, the world needs the stability and reference of its highest democratic values. And an irascible, chameleon-like, self-serving man that resents any contradiction that injures his self-image at the helm of the executive, in a country with the most nuclear weapons cannot be allowed to endanger the world or faith in the U.S.' stated commitments to peace and a sane human future! However, an effective, opinion-convincing, authoritarian salesman waging psychological war against recognizing failure in himself can project a resonance that entrances too many frustated individuals whose personal power has been diminished. And, if in a presidential power, he'll likely promote unrealistic, destabilizing narratives once the dream of his election is over and reality set in; doing it by divisively blaming others, manipulating opinion, perhaps establishing and empowering more organized, militant support groups. He will also continue supporting benefits to his socio economic level above others, even if -like today - using parts of the "defense of the common man" democratic sales pitch. He can cater to a popular attraction towards the heroic and powerful, a dream-like, pre-rational tendency living beneath the veneer of civilization, a tendency speaking to a basic in-group/out-group, animalistic, survival, win-lose, gut level, thus convincing enough individuals to empower him as THE solutions figurehead that will fix it all by doing as he wants. And he is someone asking for FAITH, blind faith in him when he says "Believe Me." He is someone SELLING hope and images in the public imagination as well as dangerously over-simplistic, solutions to a segment of society that needs recognition, faith. He is someone already questioning due process and explicitly or implicitly provoking rebellion. And he is attractive to various segments, including those that (in differing healthy and unhealthy degrees) is populated by individuals who are (psychologically-speaking) more prone and attracted to less ambiguity through easy-to-understand straightforward presentations and authority figures. But upon a careful analysis of several issues pertaining to his story - an analysis such as the one carried on by David Cay Johnston and other authors writing for magazines such as "The Atlantic," "The Economist," "The New Yorker," "The Washington Post" - the bloated, super human achiever image sold to millions doesn't hold up. Can it all a big media conspiracy to explain away the loss of points? Not likely at all. There are too many serious, independent, analytical voices pronouncing themselves. The number of suspicions coming together and holding up against the public story line are far greater than that of the other candidate. This is becoming a test aboutthe degree of denial or of closed minded fanaticism among supporters, including political leaders that should know better. it is also an opportunity to re-evaluate, reality check and re-think...carefully. It is an opportunity for many of us to consider why we believe what we believe while easily dismissing those who believe in things that seem completely incompatible. When enough facts are known blind support is bound to falter. Ultimately enough people that ultimately care more about facts and about what is convenient for them than about emotionally-driven blind faith that speaks to their frustrations will triumph. The U.S. needs to be saved. Americans wake up! They quickly need to reassess and not vote for a falsely idealized authority as they have thus far intended.

[@cogen651]

VOTE TRUMP! To send the government a black eye. Show them they aren't in charge. This is your way to show the elites they don't have the power to send in any puppet they want.

[@raikrishna2108]

just DNC & hillary is to blame for trump rissing...!!!

[@tomcotter4299]

That guy's girlfriend definitely wanted to jump Ben's bones when he was making that Mitt Romney joke.

[@theoldfinalchapters8319]

"why aren't [the blacks] responding to Trump's arguments?" .....they did.

[@polanco187]

Yes on both questions.

[@janismeier2600]

Mr. Stevens should get a life have some fun and let his Marxist ideas rest a bit

[@willrobinson1229]

I voted for Hillary, but when she called a huge percentage of the American public "deplorables", I knew she had made a huge mistake. Speaking like that is exactly how an elitist would speak.

[@fco.javierf.c.3123]

yeah, 40 minutes through, that woman just lost you the debate

[@kaarlimakela3413]

The problem with the question is STILL the nebulous definition of the word 'elites'. It could mean anything ...

[@TJ-zc5mr]

Who benefitted from Trumps tax cuts ? Enough said.

[@henkoc86]

A bit shocked over the rhetoric's of Jennifer Rubin.

[@atonewiththedust]

Holy fuck of all the horrible things about Rubin, her incessant lip-smacking noises have to be the worst.

[@GabrielaaCOLOMBIANA]

Oh my gosh, please give that woman speaker some water! That slurping is dry and disgusting...

[@janismeier2600]

seriously aggressive and showing less class than a cockroach admitting how upset he is that his propaganda is failing LOL love his pain-just destroyed wall street journal

[@marvinbarrera2856]

Miranda Sings! I knew she reminded me of someone, but couldn't quite put my finger on it...

[@LaoZi2023]

When I first started watching this debate, I looked at the crowd. I looked at how they were dressed (not always a factor...), and I said to myself. The whole audience is in the elite class, or close to it. At 19:47 Brett Stevens proved my case.

[@malcolmanderson5208]

What is real news: CNBC, MSNBC, CNN, and NPR?

[@JoachimderZweite]

There are plenty of highly educated gorgeous babes. Why could you not get at least two of them for this debate.?

[@baseboots]

The system is so messed up that i'd vote for a ham sandwich, a sedimentary rock, or even Trump. Lets burst that corporately owned political bubble. :D

[@shelbykate6195]

Jennifer Rubin's lip smacking. ugh. Brett Stephens and Rubin had no argument.

[@rebeccasatherley4727]

The patronising behaviour by elitists toward the 99% movement really spelled out the indifference of the many by the few, Trump was the back-up plan and he has betrayed them as well. I think this debate should have been “is America facing a revolution.”

[@vanillaguerilla5250]

If your a young man thinking about military Don't put your life on the line for these people Trump is a grenade and (We the people)regardless of race are pulling the pin

[@MidnightRambler]

God bless the elites. I love trump

[@theworldeatswithyou]

My prediction: Trump will lose the public vote, but win the electoral college.

[@LawnMGTIncCapeCoral]

As long as Trump sits in the Oval Office as President. I'll be good with that.

[@emotionscomeandgo]

genius right here

[@malcolmanderson5208]

This would make an effective MAGA commercial. These people are the problem.

[@yodheytheway]

None of these folks get it! They need to ask Michael Moore, he gets it. After watching this debate I finally know just how thick the Elitist Bubble is and how horribly disconnected they are from the ordinary. Its just history repeating. We know what comes next.

[@Zangorth]

I'm not sure what's more interesting, four elites debating whether elites are to blame, or four people who don't like Trump debating the merits of Trump.

[@jillschneider2953]

Jennifer Rubin is obnoxious and made no valid points.

[@Seanus32]

He is much closer to the elites than many will ever realize. I can easily show how.

[@kmacksmcdonald6475]

How does Jennifer Rubin determine what conservatives are? Pat Buchanan is much better to say that than she is

[@sukimiller8128]

I would like to see all of Trump's Emails. Clueless? Lets REOPEN the case about Trump's Tax returns. WHERE ARE THEY?

[@johnmuliyil8170]

This is post election. I have proved myself to be right.

[@ChrisClaes13]

Stephens really had to do all the heavy lifting for the Against Side. I came in on their side, but Rubin may have been the largest reason I came out undecided.

[@pankajjoshi2310]

Why no debate on, "who is responsible for Hillary Phenomenon?"

[@sureshgounder912]

the mainstream media