180 degrees

Republican politicians have inadvertently (or intentionally) created a feedback loop based on the demonization of liberal-progressive policies. The feedback loop starts with Republicans politicians setting themselves apart from Democrats by demonizing the policies enacted by Democrats. These Republican politicians focus mostly on how terrible Democratic policies are and offer few details on what the alternative would be. It doesn't matter that they gloss over the details because Republican policies generally aren't the selling point for Republican politicians. The selling point is the claim that we need to take the country in the opposite direction that it's currently going. The key word here being "opposite". One of the views I've heard expressed by the right is that, whatever policy you're trying to advance, if it pisses off liberals, then you must be doing something right.

When those Republican politicians get elected, they come into office riding a wave of so-called populism, with the explicit goal of putting an end to the policies enacted by Democrats. The feedback loop continues when those politicians act out the ideas that started off purely as campaign fodder. Ideas that are not based on an ideology, but rather on the idea that liberals are so terrible that the opposite of liberal-progressive policies must be, by definition, good. Donald Trump is a perfect example in that his policy priorities to date seem to be primarily chosen based on what got the biggest applause lines at his rallies. (Frankly, I'm surprised that he hasn't tried to lock Hillary up because that's what was most often chanted by his fans.) The problem with this feedback loop is that even if you think liberal-progressive policies are flawed, the opposite of those policies is not, by definition, good. Once those bad policies have been enacted, they cause much of the hardship that the politicians railed against in the first place.

Liberals want to protect the environment and switch to sustainable energy. Therefore Republicans want to eliminate environmental regulations, destroy the EPA, and drill, baby, drill. Liberals want gun control. Therefore Republicans want to be able to open carry everywhere, even in schools. Liberals want to raise taxes on the wealthiest Americans to support social programs. Therefore Republicans want to cut taxes on the wealthiest Americans and cut social programs. Building an oppositional political platform may have been effective at the ballot box, but it's an absurd and foolish basis for a worldview. Who does it benefit to pollute the environment? Who does it benefit to keep using fossil fuels instead of renewable energy? Who does it benefit to give tax cuts to the rich? There are undoubtedly winners if those policies are enacted, but is it the majority of Americans who will come out ahead, or is it a very elite few? Is it the oil tycoons and billionaire investors? A large number of Republican voters have been duped into cheering for a team that they're not on. Why? What is it about liberal-progressive policies that they find so objectionable that they would throw away the benefits of living in a liberal democracy just to spite liberals?