[ad_1]
To the editor: Robin Abcarian ends her piece on former President Trump’s continued help within the GOP, regardless of his explicitly authoritarian habits, with two questions: Are Republicans rational? And, do they care?
My reply is that Republicans are rational, and so they do care.
They suppose they’re getting what they need: an authoritarian chief who’s anti-democracy, racist, sexist and vengeful.
Too many journalists appear to low cost this, believing that when these voters know extra, they are going to abandon Trump. My recommendation is to hearken to his supporters, and you’ll know they’re getting what they need.
If he’s convicted and even imprisoned, he shall be in a greater place to get the help of varied miscreants. And such will happen as these individuals cross themselves off as freedom lovers and patriots.
Barry M. Dank, Palm Desert
..
To the editor: About one-third of the U.S. voters helps Trump. It does no good to characterize all these of us as irrational.
A greater strategy could also be to contemplate that their opinions could have a rational foundation, after which attempt to perceive how they arrive at their conclusions.
America is solely not working for a lot of of us. Many members of the Republican base are in a state of desperation, the place it’s pure to need to shake issues up and make a brand new begin. Trump understands this.
Republican voters could fear about subverting democracy, however they could fairly rationally give greater precedence to enhancing their very own prospects.
To me, the central situation is earnings inequality and the function of the tax code in making it worse. A sustainable society wants to supply hope, alternative and a security web to those that want one.
Catering to the billionaire class doesn’t accomplish this. The tax breaks obtainable to those that can navigate the system reward each Democrats and Republicans alike, making it extraordinarily troublesome to make headway on tax reform.
However this may be a great place to begin.
James Shirley, Simi Valley
This story initially appeared in Los Angeles Times.
[ad_2]
Source
