oh god here we go with the. "the media did it..." bullshit.
ROFL
And Trump has been contributed to by the media companies, who do you think were some of his biggest backers, and who carried him the most in this election?
Ridiculous. I own nothing because I voted for Hillary in the strongest Hillary state. My vote probably counted less than yours, but I still cast it.
Trump went after the people that he said would vote for him, and he was right. Everyone dismissed him for this strategy, but it worked. There has been a real ignorance among the democrats and other gentried elites that certain sectors of demographics will be forever theirs if they just play them lip service. Well, that didn't happen this time and the aggravating thing is that this isn't the first time such districts flipped parties to vote for the "Great Promiser of things." Hillary completely abandoned Wisconsin after the primaries. She had it in the bag.
How the fuck can that be on anyone else but her and her team?
Agent's perspective that this outcome was about race is a partial truth. White resentment was one factor. Not the most important because as I said above, a chunk of swing voters elected Trump. Those pivotal voters were likely not very racist. They just didn't like Clinton, for reasons both real and perceived. Given that this was the case, it is pointless to speculate about the degree of racism among core Trump supporters, because they are partisan and would have voted for any GOP candidate, with or without Trump's aggressive anti-immigrant stance.
Out of curiosity, since you are one who is arguing that Clinton essentially ignored white working class voters, what do you think she could have done to appeal to them? The only thing I can think of is not saying "basket of deplorables." From a policy perspective, I can't think of a single thing. If white working class people think that conservative economic policies, like cutting taxes on the super rich, are to their benefit, there is nothing the democrats can do about that unless they want to become a conservative party instead of a liberal one. Liberals believe that the economic policies they favor benefit everyone but the super rich, not just minorities. So what specific positions should she have taken to win over the white working class voters?
I'm convinced presidential elections boil down to simple personality contests to the general public, not policy. Bill Clinton and GWB won 2 terms because they had a more appealing personality to the average Joe than their opponents. Obama was a much more captivating orator than McCain and Romney. And while Trump has the personality of a used car salesman, Hillary struggled to generate any real enthusiasm outside of her core base because she is a policy nerd at heart.
I think this election is the starkest example that policy is second place when it comes to getting elected. I don't remember an election when one candidate was so vague on specifics on policy as Trump was.
Basically, Bernie was the better pick for the Democrats this time around. I think Biden would also have beaten Trump. Next time around, I think the D's have to go with a blue collar personality magnet.
What was lacking was a cogent and informed path to benefit whose in fear of losing what they have worked for and hoped to acquire at some point. Instead of relating to concerns she took the divisive path as did her opponent. Her girls are white and thats why they are secure would be one example. No they are children of the wealthy elite. Other people of her color and gender cannot say that with certainty.
And that's where she failed. What would she do that inspires hope? What changes would she make in "business as usual" and constructively reduce the wealth divide? Education? What good is that where everyone is subject to a decreasing pool of good jobs relative to flipping burgers?
When Wells Fargo didn't let their people go to the bathroom and yet management benefited by the millions, what was her solution?
Besides short term programs what did she offer to change the employment situation? What about creative taxation which benefits shareholders and employees alike. If infrastructure is brought into the US, or jobs which are good then lower taxes. If not then no loopholes and they go up.
Sooner or later the stockholders will get on the back of the Boards and they can no longer take their situation for granted. The stockholders benefit and the citizen as well. Naturally this has to go to everyone regardless of race, but based on merit. Those who are disadvantaged should be helped to realize their potential.
Everyone is uplifted.
Now you might come up with reasons this might not work, but it's something. It's a goal and an indication of goodwill.
We need a leader of Americans, not panderers cultivating more hate and despair. We need to try.
FYI, this is probably well worth a read.
http://www.politico.com/magazine/story/2016/11/hillary-clinton-loses-2016-election-214439
I think this outcome had less to do with Trump and his "demographics" than it did with the right's 25+ year sliming of Clinton. Another dem who hadn't been slimed probably would have beaten Trump, "demographics" be damned. Sure, Trump had a coalition. So did Clinton. The difference between this outcome and what the polls predicted was about 4% or 1 in 22 Americans. Those swing voters were independents who broke for Trump or Bernie supporters who either voted for Trump or sat it out. They are who made that 4% difference. Trump's core base is and was always there, and was always going to vote for Trump, and would likely have voted for any other GOP candidate.
This election doesn't reflect a tectonic shift in the American electorate. It is, rather, testament to the power of effectively shift boating a candidate, something both parties do but which the GOP is much better at.
And so if one did not support Hillary they have the "Uppity darkie" mentality? You disallow any other perspective or concern on the part of people.
People vote for many reasons and all are individuals with their lives and personal history. We've gotten into the "whites are ignorant and need to be punished" or "all that is a minority is a threat".
That's the way to destruction. As far as real poverty and squalor, what do you personally know of it? What suffering have you seen? I'm interested to know if you are operating from the theoretical or have first hand experience of poverty and the misery of others.
If there is one thing I can give Trump credit for, it's the fact that he humiliated both Republicans and Democrats in this election. The Democrats became too selfish, greedy, and complacent in this election, and the Republicans have underestimated how popular Trump managed to become all due to the fact that he's not a politician.
I'm not going to criticize your ideas, only your view that Clinton had no ideas to create jobs. She supported investing in infrustructure, for example. Who said all those jobs would go to minorities?
This wasn't about job creating policies. If white working class people broke hard for Trump, it's that they perceived her as not being sympathetic to their plight. The key word being perceived. It was a matter of trust, personality and charisma (or lack thereof).
BTW, it's looking right now like Clinton may have actually won the popular vote, or lost by an incredibly tiny margin. Which brings into question the notion that this election was some kind of ground breaking demographic shift. This outcome turned on a small number of swing voters in certain states making what IMO was a terrible choice. Which is their right in a democracy. And as another poster has said, it was their choice, and they own the consequences.
All my peers in macroeconomics class are laughing at how stupid and naive the average American is. Trump is a moron as are his followers. Let's hope you idiots don't start the next Great Depression or World War 3 and drag Australia and NZ with you, but I wouldn't put it past you guys seeing as how you elected a clown as your president...
That certainly played into it, but you don't fight through that kind of slime by calling those people that would otherwise vote for you a "basket of deplorables." The Clintons navigated through those decades of mud-tossing pretty well, but all the while they were instrumental in re-shaping the party from a progressive, populist, working-class party to a more centrally elitist "big solution" party that stuck to high-minded think-tank socioeconomic experimentation to try and convince those working class stiffs to "learn to be like us!"--upward mobility (your job disappeared because that's what happens in societies; you are probably better off gaining new skills to make yourself competitive in interesting times--you just need to be a harvard-educated master of the universe like us and your life will be better!) rather than address the fact that these people really aren't going to be moving to different places and easily gaining new skills. This is the kind of thing I believe in (well, I don't think anyone can just easily be some harvard-educated MotU) and, to some degree think it's a workable practice if you instead treat people with respect and dignity, work with them in their world rather than tell them what they need to do to be more mobile and change their lives. This election was a kick in the ass for the modern democratic party and they really need to get back to those core values and learn how to talk to their historic base again.
None of this was reflected in the polling, but it is exactly what happened. Hillary could have probably survived that kind of nonsense had she spent more time talking to these people rather than preach at them from afar.
Dems have a legit problem here and it has been brewing for some time. The altright nutters have been saying it and no one listened to them. I don't find it difficult to admit how foolish we were on this because there really is no other way to look at it, when you consider the specific counties and demographics of obama and bernie "change" working class folks that roundly rejected her. These were also Bill people. You can argue all you want that their thinking Trump would fix them was irrational, but they still voted. Their problems are real and they do feel pain. They have repeatedly voted for the simplest message that promises to fix things for them. How hard is it to accept that several decades of these voters hearing hope and change and free trade, supporting it, then either having it bite them in the ass or the hope people just walk away from them once they got their vote, is going to cause real, visceral anger?
For all his faults and all his lies and blustering, Trump realized that and despite all advice he received to ignore them, he still went for them. And it worked. Conway and the Sp33dy's and LK's around here were constantly talking about this "silent, hidden Trump supporter base" lurking outside the polling. They were right. ..and these are democratic voters. That has to sting and I hope it does.
Remember how many hoped that Repubs would "learn from 2012" and become more inclusive, less radical, less racist and dismissive of poor people? Think they care about that anymore? Nope. Let's hope the dems, at least, absorb the primary lessons here and make attempts to restore their traditional base. Of course, that all assumes that Trump was just lying to them with empty promises as everyone before him. What if he wasn't? What if, even through dumb luck, these folks lot truly improves in the next couple of years?
That certainly played into it, but you don't fight through that kind of slime by calling those people that would otherwise vote for you a "basket of deplorables." The Clintons navigated through those decades of mud-tossing pretty well, but all the while they were instrumental in re-shaping the party from a progressive, populist, working-class party to a more centrally elitist "big solution" party that stuck to high-minded think-tank socioeconomic experimentation to try and convince those working class stiffs to "learn to be like us!"--upward mobility (your job disappeared because that's what happens in societies; you are probably better off gaining new skills to make yourself competitive in interesting times--you just need to be a harvard-educated master of the universe like us and your life will be better!) rather than address the fact that these people really aren't going to be moving to different places and easily gaining new skills. This is the kind of thing I believe in (well, I don't think anyone can just easily be some harvard-educated MotU) and, to some degree think it's a workable practice if you instead treat people with respect and dignity, work with them in their world rather than tell them what they need to do to be more mobile and change their lives. This election was a kick in the ass for the modern democratic party and they really need to get back to those core values and learn how to talk to their historic base again.
None of this was reflected in the polling, but it is exactly what happened. Hillary could have probably survived that kind of nonsense had she spent more time talking to these people rather than preach at them from afar.
Dems have a legit problem here and it has been brewing for some time. The altright nutters have been saying it and no one listened to them. I don't find it difficult to admit how foolish we were on this because there really is no other way to look at it, when you consider the specific counties and demographics of obama and bernie "change" working class folks that roundly rejected her. These were also Bill people. You can argue all you want that their thinking Trump would fix them was irrational, but they still voted. Their problems are real and they do feel pain. They have repeatedly voted for the simplest message that promises to fix things for them. How hard is it to accept that several decades of these voters hearing hope and change and free trade, supporting it, then either having it bite them in the ass or the hope people just walk away from them once they got their vote, is going to cause real, visceral anger?
For all his faults and all his lies and blustering, Trump realized that and despite all advice he received to ignore them, he still went for them. And it worked. Conway and the Sp33dy's and LK's around here were constantly talking about this "silent, hidden Trump supporter base" lurking outside the polling. They were right. ..and these are democratic voters. That has to sting and I hope it does.
Remember how many hoped that Repubs would "learn from 2012" and become more inclusive, less radical, less racist and dismissive of poor people? Think they care about that anymore? Nope. Let's hope the dems, at least, absorb the primary lessons here and make attempts to restore their traditional base. Of course, that all assumes that Trump was just lying to them with empty promises as everyone before him. What if he wasn't? What if, even through dumb luck, these folks lot truly improves in the next couple of years?
Like I said before the election there cannot be a mandate. The reason I say this is that neither's acceptance was greater than their disfavorability ratings. We had no choice but to elect someone we disliked more than not.
So I agree, this is no great shift in terms of demographics, but maybe a call to self examination? Who can say?
Clinton was too soft on the islam problem.
For Trump to win this big many minorities / women / democrats crossed the isle. It's the only explanation.
Total repudiation of Liberalism and the Liberal Agenda / Democrat Party.
My self-examination tells me to never again support a candidate who can be trashed the way the GOP did with Clinton. In hindsight, I now admit that Bernie would have been the better choice. Not because he speaks to the pain of average Americans or would have been a better president, but because he didn't have the baggage that Clinton had.
BTW, it's looking right now like Clinton may have actually won the popular vote, or lost by an incredibly tiny margin. Which brings into question the notion that this election was some kind of ground breaking demographic shift. This outcome turned on a small number of swing voters in certain states making what IMO was a terrible choice. Which is their right in a democracy. And as another poster has said, it was their choice, and they own the consequences.
My self-examination tells me to never again support a candidate who can be trashed the way the GOP did with Clinton. In hindsight, I now admit that Bernie would have been the better choice. Not because he speaks to the pain of average Americans or would have been a better president, but because he didn't have the baggage that Clinton had.