Yes. And on top of that, an enormous amount of people are being red-pilled re: fake news.
They are illegal aliens
They are rapists.
They are human traffickers.
They are drug dealers.
They are gang members.
It is hard to know where to begin. The author ignores a pretty clear conservative agenda as evidenced by the Gorsuch appointment and stricter immigration control. Instead, the author appears to think that anti-Trump protestors getting roughed up at rallies is a significant phenomenon, ignoring the fact that most of the political violence has been in the opposite direction. The Economist perfectly reflects the thinking of the aspirational class in the U.K.: they are liberal on the US spectrum and have near zero understanding of US politics and of their own ignorance.
Reason Number 0: The demonicRATs all suck.
I loathe the snarky Economist.
Look at how from the beginning it oozes with disdain.
“Most of them fit the nationalist, nativist, populist programme that Mr Bannon has done more than anyone apart from the president himself to shape”
Doing something to make your country better means you’re a “nationalist” (and you know what they mean by that.)
Giving priority to citizens over the hoard of illegal invaders, means you’re a “nativist”.
And looking out for the common people means you’re a “populist”.
As I said, I despise this leftist, snooty, elitist rag with a passion.
401K - UP!
Jobs - UP!
Energy exploration - UP!
Illegal immigration - DOWN!
Government regulations - DOWN!
ISIS Caliphate - DOWN AND ALMOST OUT!
"He talks about building an alliance of working people that will hold power for 50 years."
The Econimist. Pfft. More like The Globalist.
Another anonymous hit piece.
So many amateur psychologists.
“may”?????