Revisiting How Michael Moore Accurately Predicted Trump Would Be Elected

ATSers are probably most familiar with Bobaganoosh's thread from October 24th when he posted a video of Michael Moore predicting Trump would win based off of Moore's experience with Michigan voters anger with the system/current government/status quo.

ATSers are likely less familiar with IAMTAT's thread from July 21st that contains a video of Michael Moore on Real Time with Bill Maher which seems to be Michael's initial announcement of his opinion that Trump will win the election.

But Moore's realization that something bigger was around the corner (within politics) came years ago, in 2010, although back then, he just wasn't sure of exactly how/who. Shall we??... let's!!

It links back to the housing crisis, Wall Street and the bail outs.

An article from the Observer dated 12OCT2010 details the general attitude of Wall Street executives regarding the government's decision to employ a nationwide foreclosure moratorium in order to investigate probable fraud - The Foreclosure Fiasco and Wall Street's Shrug.

The article begins with:

“The first thing that needs to happen, I think, is to get these people out of their homes,” a man wearing a bespoke blue-striped shirt, a Hermés tie patterned with elephants and Ferragamo loafers said recently. “Correct! I’ll explain,” the veteran member of a bank restructuring and advisory team said.

The article ends with:

“The question to me is not do you foreclose or do you not foreclose. The question is when and with what philosophy you foreclose,” the man on the bank restructuring team said. “If you want to reduce the amount of leveraged homeowners you have, you need to ultimately kick them out of their homes.” A colleague walked up: His recommendation was to burn houses. It would lower the supply.

There are sentiments from members from Goldman Sachs, Citi, etc. in between.

Moore, with his finger on the pulse, writes a piece ten days later: Burning Down the House: A Crime Beyond Denunciation on 21OCT2010 in which he relates the 'burning of homes to create demand (capitalism)' with the following excerpt from John Steinbeck's The Grapes of Wrath:

Behind the fruitfulness are men of understanding and knowledge and skill, men who experiment with seed, endlessly developing the techniques for greater crops of plants...These are great men...They have transformed the world with their knowledge...

The works of the roots of the vines, of the trees, must be destroyed to keep up the price, and this is the saddest, bitterest thing of all. Carloads of oranges dumped on the ground. The people came for miles to take the fruit, but this could not be. How would they buy oranges at twenty cents a dozen if they could drive out and pick them up? And men with hoses squirt kerosene on the oranges, and they are angry at the crime, angry at the people who have come to take the fruit. A million people hungry, needing the fruit -- and kerosene sprayed over the golden mountains.

There is a crime here that goes beyond denunciation. There is a sorrow here that weeping cannot symbolize. There is a failure here that topples all our success. The fertile earth, the straight tree rows, the sturdy trunks, and the ripe fruit. And children dying of pellagra must die because a profit cannot be taken from an orange. And coroners must dill in the certificates -- died of malnutrition -- because the food must rot, must be forced to rot...

In the souls of the people the grapes of wrath are filling and growing heavy, growing heavy for the vintage.

From Moore's piece (which can no longer be viewed on his website but I found HERE):

It is -- because capitalism is insane. It doesn't matter that we have a giant oversupply of something, and a giant number of people who desperately need that specific thing. The only thing that matters is: can this something be sold at a profit? If not, the obvious solution is to reduce supply by setting it on fire. And maybe this will create a business opportunity for the Koch brothers to sell tissues to America's newly-homeless as they watch the empty houses burn down.

At the end Moore wonders who will harvest the grapes of wrath born from the crisis that are swelling within Americans:

The Democrats, led by Franklin D. Roosevelt and pushed by unions, harvested the Depression's grapes of wrath and created with them the foundations of middle class America. And someone's going to harvest 2010's grapes of wrath. But it doesn't have to be us. In fact, if you're like me, you're getting very worried about who it might be

And now we know! Donald J. Trump

Jimmy Dore summed it up which allowed me to present the pieces to you ATSers, so if you are able to view YT videos, please do although, there might be some profanity

Even a broken clock as the correct time twice a day....
This one lucked up and got one thing right in his entire life....

originally posted by: Gothmog
Even a broken clock as the correct time twice a day....
This one lucked up and got one thing right in his entire life....

Nope, not really... he saw the writing on the wall.

How'd you get through all that material in 3 minutes? You deserve a star!!!!!!!!!!!

a reply to: Gothmog

He seen the same thing a lot of people in michigan seen. I called michigan back in june.

That flint issue likely cost a percentage point or two. Michiganders look at Michigan and Snyder now compared to Granholm and the decade long recession before.

a reply to: jellyrev

Some seem to forget the Grandholm years. I for one am happy to see here gone and especially not have a cabinet position under HRC. With the fading away of unions here in MI, goes that block of Dem voters. I was surprised as hell to see my county go Trump given the downtown area.

a reply to: six67seven

An interesting read but I'm not sure what the point you are trying to make is....?

Moore was right about something or he was somehow prophetic?

I find the conflicting views (from others and within myself) about what happened during the mortgage crisis to be much more interesting.... but I'll leave it at that for he moment because I don't want to drift your thread too much.

I don't see Moore's "feat" of prognostication as particularly insightful. All he had to do is 1) Be disaffected, which surely he has made a career of being, and 2.) Figure out that both parties are part of the establishment, rather than just the GOP. Once Moore got over his fixation with Bush it was a natural to take on the entire system. He had two choices, and guessed the right one. He's somewhat famous, so he gets the Silver Star and the many, many people who also guessed correctly are stuck with the Legion of Merit, given out by the gross.

Although Trump's "win" is now being analyzed the way OP has pictured it, it really has very little to do with those issues. The elections are always very close. It's been a very long time since we had an actual "landslide" for anyone. The bigger reasons he won were a) The Electoral College trumped (sorry) the popular vote (Note: I'm a proponent of the EC. This is not a criticism, but just a fact.) and b) Jill Stein siphoned off enough votes in key states from the Dems to give the win to Trump. In those swing states Stein won sixteen times more votes than Hillary lost by. She pulled a Nader. Thank you, Jill. Now she wants a recount. Send the money to her and it might go to the effort, or it just might go into her coffers.

These are very small points that could easily have turned out differently. The margin of victory here is extremely small. You can't really claim a 'largely disaffected electorate' chose Trump to thumb their noses at the establishment when most voters, in truth, did not. So while Moore can snag 'credit" for being correct, I think it is a mistake to read too much into it. Moore got lucky; so did Trump.

a reply to: six67seven
Cause I know of Michael Moore ? Can fast forward . If you know your opponent's playbook , the game is over before it starts...

a reply to: eluryh22

I think it simply paints the picture of revolt against the staus quo.

BUT

No mainstream outlet even hinted at this revolt against the system.

This should be an event We The People should build off of. This should be an event that career politicians and fresh faces alike react to, albeit with contrasting reactions.

Its just like the housing crisis itself. The writing is on the wall but only a few want to see it. The rest want to continue to watch the lying MSM and take it in as gospel.

This should be a realization of the absolutely crushing power We The People house, and the first event of many where we exercise it.

Im super happy to see this concept lost on every reader. Sooooper encouraging!!!

originally posted by: Gothmog
Even a broken clock as the correct time twice a day....
This one lucked up and got one thing right in his entire life....

Tell me what he has gotten wrong?

a reply to: six67seven

No mainstream outlet even hinted at this revolt against the system.

True... but many people (myself included) had been saying for quite some time that the MSM was entirely full of it. In my estimation, their hope was that be continuing to put forward "fake news" (their words, not mine) and fake polls and slanting towards Hillary/Establishment SO HEAVILY... that somehow the lies would become true.... or at least enough people would believe it was true so they would either vote for Hillary or not bother to vote for Trump and stay home.

This should be an event We The People should build off of.

OF COURSE IT SHOULD BE!!!! Unfortunately, I have very little confidence that it will. My only hope comes from Brexit was a precursor to Trump which is hopefully a precursor to Merkel's ouster and so on (as I'm hearing France may make a change soon).

This should be an event that career politicians and fresh faces alike react to, albeit with contrasting reactions.

Again, it SHOULD be but you can't forget how far reaching the tentacles of corruption and financial influence extend. Big money still has big influence. The career crooks still owe their financial masters and the fresh faced potential have no backing (other than us... should we muster the conviction to stand together... and find a fresh face that is worth our support).

Im super happy to see this concept lost on every reader. Sooooper encouraging!!!

To be fair to the generic reader of your OP.... although it appears I agree with you.... the OP wasn't really clear (at least to me... but I am a bit thick sometimes).

a reply to: eluryh22

Im guilty of having little faith in the populace as well.

So, when we get a huge victory (its the event to recognize, not the televised victor [Trump]) we need to build off of it.

I will try to spell it out in my next thread.

a reply to: six67seven

So, when we get a huge victory (its the event to recognize, not the televised victor [Trump]) we need to build off of it.

Amen to THAT!

a reply to: six67seven

That guy one day for democrats,then Trump,he's an idiot,.he is all over the place,he just got lucky once,even a loser gets lucky sometimes

originally posted by: six67seven
a reply to: eluryh22

I think it simply paints the picture of revolt against the staus quo. BUT No mainstream outlet even hinted at this revolt against the system. This should be an event We The People should build off of. This should be an event that career politicians and fresh faces alike react to, albeit with contrasting reactions.

This should be a realization of the absolutely crushing power We The People house, and the first event of many where we exercise it. Im super happy to see this concept lost on every reader. Sooooper encouraging!!!

Oh, please! Stop with the hyperbole. The other possibility is that you are completely wrong. This is hardly overwhelming. This isn't a "revolt" in any sense of the term. Trump lost the popular vote, after all, by over 2 million votes. A combination of disparate factors that had nothing to do with a "popular revolt" gave Trump a razor-thin win. Those factors include the Electoral College and the fact that Jill Stein siphoned leftist votes away from Clinton. If Jill Stein had not run, those votes would have gone to Clinton in several key states that would have given Clinton the win. Yet Jill Stein got 1% of the votes.

If there was any "revolt" at all, it was against the GOP, which put forth a lackluster group of candidates who were either extreme right-wing (Cruz), inexperienced (Rubio). or ineffectual (everyone else.) The GOP electorate is disaffected with the established order anyway. that's no surprise, but they also obviously felt the GOP was giving the same old losers they had for the last few elections. The GOP folks who COULD have given Clinton a run for her money chose not to run. I can't say that I blame them. And the GOP establishment reaction after Trump won the nomination truly was deplorable. Shame on them. Trump's nomination was clearly a repudiation of the GOP establishment and the GOP had best get its act together of it wants to survive.

Because the left wing Democrats have never been as far left as they are now, and there are a whole lot of people who want this country to move even further left. This is NOT your parents' Democratic Party. The bulk of it is composed of Takers, not Makers, and their continued presence is a drain on the health of the country as a whole. they're contributing their votes for more handouts, and that's just about their only contribution at all. THIS group represents the "rushing power of the people" not your mythical revolt. It's not so much that your errant concept of what has happened is lost on every reader as it is what has happened is lost on you. You're acting superior here thinking you are being insightful when it is you who doesn't get it.

Goldman Sach's and Citi financed Obama's multiple campaigns and Hillary's campgain. They are not fans of Trump.

The only way this means anything is if conditions in the country improve. I am not sure they will although they could, but they always can. We will see. only time will tell.

originally posted by: JinMI
a reply to: jellyrev

Some seem to forget the Grandholm years. I for one am happy to see here gone and especially not have a cabinet position under HRC. With the fading away of unions here in MI, goes that block of Dem voters. I was surprised as hell to see my county go Trump given the downtown area.

IF she was for population control she is one of the best. One the very few states to experience population decline, As people had to flee the state to find a job and it was attracting no one.

a reply to: schuyler

Agree to disagree.

I for one think Michael Moore has far more insight into this election cycle (and a plethora of other topics re: America) than you or I, and he stated in several times that Trump would win because people are hurting and it will be a huge middle finger to the establishment. He had been talking to constituents from the rust belt for years. He lays it out rather clearly.

That just happened... and you say there's no sense of revolt in that??? .... yet then you go on to say 'oh there might be a revolt against the GOP.' well duh!