A Deep and Boiling Anger Towards Politics

Posted by Jack

A new NBC/Wall Street Journal poll indicates that the animosity toward the political establishment remains very strong, with 70 percent saying they are angry.

The political and cultural upheaval of the last four years has divided the country on ever-hardening partisan and generational lines, but one feeling unites Americans as much as it did before the 2016 election.

The latest NBC News/Wall Street Journal poll finds that — despite Americans’ overall satisfaction with the state of the U.S. economy and their own personal finances — a majority say they are angry at the nation’s political and financial establishment, anxious about its economic future, and pessimistic about the country they’re leaving for the next generation.

Four years ago, we uncovered a deep and boiling anger across the country engulfing our political system,” said Democratic pollster Jeff Horwitt of Hart Research Associates, which conducted this survey in partnership with the Republican firm Public Opinion Strategies. “Four years later, with a very different political leader in place, that anger remains at the same level.” 

Americans say they feel angry “because our political system seems to only be working for the insiders with money and power, like those on Wall Street or in Washington. “

Trump was the benefactor of this anger 4 years ago, but the question today is, will he still be able to capitalize on it?

This entry was posted in Uncategorized and tagged , , , , , . Bookmark the permalink.

15 Responses to A Deep and Boiling Anger Towards Politics

  1. J Soden says:

    Anger doubles when those in goofernment service are found to have lied to the FISA court, attempted a coup on a president, taken bribes from other countries and have not received justice from the law.
    There is supposed to be ONE system of justice here, but many have evaded punishment for their crimes of what could be considered treason because of their political connections – or buying off the 7th Floor!

    • Peggy says:

      There had better be equal justice for criminal elitists vs us common folk. And appropriate punishment for those found guilty. Seeing Hillary, Comey, McCabe, etc. walking around free while a sailor who took a couple of pictures, to show his kid where he worked, sits in a prison is not equal justice!

        • Peggy says:


          “… for having deleted more than 30,000 emails from a server she used during her time as secretary of state. While Clinton and her lawyers have said ALL of those emails were PERSONAL,”



          • Chris says:

            The McCarthy piece falls apart once you realize it’s based on the ludicrous idea that Comey shouldn’t have briefed Trump about the Steele dossier at all, or asked him about it, or taken notes on it. If he hadn’t done those things, McCarthy would be blasting him for that. The Solomon piece repeats the lie that the Trump campaign was surveilled–as I have explained to you many times, the only member of the campaign surveilled was Carter Page, and it began after he had already left the campaign. You’ve never provided any evidence to the contrary, you’ve just repeated this lie over and over.

          • Peggy says:

            You are blinded by your hatred for the man and his supporters.

            Why did Comey tell the FISA court four times the Steele Dossier was verified, as required, when it wasn’t and couldn’t be because a majority of its content was made up? Comey then tells Trump three times it wasn’t verified. Which is it? Can’t be both. Did he lie to Trump or to the FISA courts.

          • Chris says:

            Because you don’t understand what “verified” means in each of those two contexts.

            More fundamentally, though, much of the commentary claiming some clear breach of protocol in the Carter Page FISA simply misunderstands what it means to say that a FISA application has been “verified.” It does not mean that every tip provided by a source has been independently corroborated. Rather, “verification” refers to the process laid out in the so-called “Woods procedures,” which require Justice Department officials to verify that representations made in a submission to the Foreign Intelligence Surveillance Court match the information in the FBI’s investigative files. If the application relies upon a source for some claim, does the documentation in the case file support that the source actually said what the application presents the source as saying? In this case, then, “verification” would not mean the FBI had necessarily tracked down Steele’s own sources to corroborate his reporting. Rather, it would require that someone “verify” that when the application summarized what Steele had told the FBI, it did so accurately.

            This should, in a way, be a matter of common sense. If the FBI had independently confirmed a tip from a source, after all, that independent confirmation would be in the application. Indeed, why would you rely on a source at all if you had been able to directly confirm their claims? It would be fairly bizarre for the FBI to say “our own investigation has unearthed proof that our source’s claims were true, but we’re not going to make that proof part of our showing to the court.” In this case, it seems as though the FBI was quite straightforward in telling the FISA Court that their reliance on Steele’s information was based on his track record of providing reliable evidence in the past, not on having independently duplicated his reporting. There is a reasonable argument to be made that the Court should not have been satisfied with this sort of second- or third-hand evidence, but it can’t be reasonably argued that they didn’t understand what the evidence was, or were tricked into thinking the FBI had extra secret evidence to support their claims. It is not so uncommon, after all, for intelligence investigations to involve information provided by foreign allies that the U.S. government cannot itself directly check. If Israel tells the FBI about information reported by an undercover agent in a terror group, the FBI can check whether that intelligence is consistent with their other information, but will rarely be able to interview the mole directly. The question, as always, is not whether one has indisputable proof, but what level of credibility the agency ascribes to the varied types of information it has available.


  2. Chris says:

    Americans say they feel angry “because our political system seems to only be working for the insiders with money and power, like those on Wall Street or in Washington. “

    Trump was the benefactor of this anger 4 years ago,

    Which, as you know, makes no sense. Trump was born a millionaire and has been the beneficiary of numerous bailouts after losing more money than most Americans will ever see. So was the anger really about class? Or was it about race and intellect? A lot of people didn’t take too kindly to being lectured by an educated man of Obama’s shade, so they elected someone whose idea of intellect is saying “I know words. I have the best words.” After all, if someone like that can be successful and make all of the people those voters already hated mad all the time, a gullible person could easily buy the fantasy that they could have all that too, one day. They just have to ignore the “born into millions” part, which is easier to them than ignoring Obama’s color.

    A real thing that happened last week is that the president said he wanted to buy Greenland, the Danish prime minister rightly called that absurd, so then the president cancelled a Denmark trip because he was mad that she called his absurd idea absurd. This reads like a parody of what a Trump administration would be like, written by a liberal in 2016. But it happened. And you can look forward to lots more stories like it happening, because whatever strange condition the president has, it’s getting worse. Or you can decide to not vote for him, which should really be the easiest choice in the world.

    • SickOfItAll says:

      Chris, Your assumption that people that voted for Trump are inherently racist is very near sighted and quite frankly im sick of hearing it. It’s always the same story from those that don’t have anything intelligent to say. Just blame it on race. I voted for Obama the first time he ran because I got caught up in his slick lies. I was fooled. I voted for Trump and I’m, proud of it! Trump is the First President in my lifetime that has kept his word and delivered on his campaign promises. He hasn’t been perfect, but I don’t know of anyone that is. At least he is not selling us out like Obama did when he gave China the Top Secret Private Information of ALL our Spies! At least he didn’t sell our ballistic missile technology to china like the Clintons! No, Trump was not working with Russia. That is so obvious now that even the New York Times is changing their propaganda to the racist hoax now.

      • J Soden says:

        Well said, and hope we hear more from you here on Post Scripts!!!

      • Chris says:

        Well first, it wasn’t an assumption, it was a conclusion based on evidence I provided (and a lot more I could give you—I didn’t even include Trump’s lengthy history of racist statements and actions this time; would you like me to?), and a conclusion that makes much more sense than Jack’s “Trump voters were motivated by class-based rage” theory, as I clearly explained. Second, nowhere in what I wrote does it imply that all Trump voters are racist. Third, if you were angry at Obama for lying but then voted for Trump, who objectively lies more often than Obama, as well as any other politician on the left or right, you are motivated by completely irrational impulses. Don’t get mad if people theorize that one of those irrational impulses might be racism. Fourth, I have no idea what these conspiracy theories about Obama and Hillary and China refer to—please provide links. Finally, while you may not personally be overtly racist, you voted for a racist and are planning to do so again, so while you may not harbor ill will toward minorities, your indifference to their suffering under Trump marks you as at least passively racist—you don’t care what happens to them as long as you feel like you’re “winning.”

  3. Chris says:

    The president has spent the past three hours tweeting about how everyone is mean to him, from Fox News to the Federal Reserve, ending with the hilarious line, “…And by the way, I’m the best thing that’s ever happened to Puerto Rico!” as if the country just broke up with him by text. For Trump, every day is Festivus and every hour is the Airing of Grievances. Forget whether he’s presidential; he’s barely even a functioning human being. Mentally healthy people do not act like this. The president is not well. So what are you going to do about it?

  4. Peggy says:

    Democrats will lie and destroy a man and his family to get what they want.

    Christine Blasey Ford’s Lawyer: Okay Fine, Protecting Abortion Was Part of Why She Accused Kavanaugh:


  5. Peggy says:

    FYI – Hillary’s email court case update.

    Federal Judge Warns Government Lawyers in Hillary Clinton Email Case: ‘No FOIA Exemption for Political Expedience’:

Leave a Reply

Your email address will not be published.