Great plan. You should indeed not concern yourself at all with the issues that are important to ~70% of voters.
Because condescending elitism worked so well the first time...You sound pretty bitter for winning an election. Can't even take pride in it, have to blame the opponent. So sad.
As vile as the vile on is, I don’t get the obsession with him and his supporters and their real or perceived motivations.
Same reason people are obsessed with Hitler. You need to understand exactly how things went so wrong before you can make them right again, or at least avoid it in the future.
Theres literally thousand of articles online about this exact subject. And probably a book or two.
Everyone I know that voted for Trump did so because they so thoroughly disliked Hillary.
“Negative voting” is higher for Trump than it was for past GOP candidates. While most Republican voters say Trump does represent the party’s core principles, they are divided over whether they are mostly voting “for” him or “against” Clinton. In our most recent survey, 51% of registered voters supporting Trump say they see their choice as more of a vote against Clinton than a vote for Trump. That is the highest share of “negative voting” among supporters of Republican candidates dating back to George W. Bush’s first presidential race in 2000.
Among Clinton supporters, 57% view their choice as for Clinton, rather than against Trump. The share of Clinton’s backers who view their choice positively is less than the share of pro-Barack Obama voters who did so in 2008 (77%) or 2012 (73%), but much higher than the level of positive support for John Kerry in 2004 (39%).
I don't think he's all that concerned.Thanks for your concern.
Not worth much to me. The dangers of socialism are far down the list of my concerns, having figured out that my fear of them is the results of billions spent on propaganda to demonize anybody who even considers what real socialism might look like. What I see is a nation of sleep walkers chanting an anti socialism mantra in its sleep.As vile as the vile one is, I don’t get the obsession with him and his supporters and their real or perceived motivations. All the left has to do is to offer a better alternative. The Mrs, the Pelosi, the Schumer and co , does more need to be said?
Yes there is a lot of racism in America, but it elected a black man for President twice, very very recently. I think the left is caught in denial. At least that is the case on this forum.
To be fair there are exceptions like Sanders who don’t play this game. I disagree with his socialist philosophy though for what its worth
Lots of explanations, lots of finger pointing, everyone analyzing the most esoteric of reasons, all of them pointing to some fundamental flaw in the minds of Trump voters. I guess that makes you feel better, but it's time get over it, Hillary lost. Donald Trump is the President of the United States. Ten thousand study's and surveys aren't going to change that.Or maybe that's just what they were telling themselves. It's easier than recognizing their own justifiable social and economic anxieties.
Interesting stuff-
https://www.washingtonpost.com/blog...inue-to-support-trump/?utm_term=.b55e540cff44
https://www.nytimes.com/2017/07/20/opinion/how-fear-of-falling-explains-the-love-of-trump.html
Lots of explanations, lots of finger pointing, everyone analyzing the most esoteric of reasons, all of them pointing to some fundamental flaw in the minds of Trump voters. I guess that makes you feel better, but it's time get over it, Hillary lost. Donald Trump is the President of the United States. Ten thousand study's and surveys aren't going to change that.
Lots of explanations, lots of finger pointing, everyone analyzing the most esoteric of reasons, all of them pointing to some fundamental flaw in the minds of Trump voters. I guess that makes you feel better, but it's time get over it, Hillary lost. Donald Trump is the President of the United States. Ten thousand study's and surveys aren't going to change that.
People have short memories. When Clinton ran against Obama, she was blowing the same dog whistle aimed at motivating deplorables by evoking Jesse Jackson, Farrakhan and Pastor Wright, not to mention that photo of Obama in Somali garb. The deplorables couldn’t stop Obama. Clinton was a vulnerable candidate and our enemies siezed the opportunity to strike, using the same playbook Obama used to beat her.Not a big fan of clinton, but she clearly pointed out that there were certain 'baskets' of trump supporters, some due to economic issues and feeling their government let them down, some just being regular republicans who would never vote for hillary, and then the 'deplorables' (the racists/sexists/xenophobes). The thing is, Hillary wasn't wrong about that, but she was a fucking moron for actually saying it out loud.
Not worth much to me. The dangers of socialism are far down the list of my concerns, having figured out that my fear of them is the results of billions spent on propaganda to demonize anybody who even considers what real socialism might look like.
.
Again people need to get off the media and stuff and experience the actual world. Which is not something easy I know for a affluent tech geek introvert forum.
No there is nothing of the sort of Nazi movement going on in America apart from the fringes where its always been. Again because it sounds boring and doesn’t sell, not the kind of thing you’d hear in media. Which makes me go back to the first paragraph above.
Boring and unsensational is not something you want people to hear if your product is supposedly info and news.
I thought of several responses to your posts but I think it is best to ask first : what does real socialism look like?
Real socialism as a term in the context I expressed it is that socialism that would exist if the altered reality notions of what socialism is imagined to be were to cease to exist. If there is a real socialism it would be that which is when all the bull shit we have learned isn't. Thus, you are as qualified to answer the question as I am. Equally, any answer I gave would be useless if you still held to a bull shit definition. I would just look like I didn't know what I was talking about. Likewise, if you do figure it out it may be that I won't be able to follow your answer owing to some bullshit belief I still have.I thought of several responses to your posts but I think it is best to ask first : what does real socialism look like?
Very well said. And if one reads the details of the article, the population surveyed is not a representative sample of the voting public, but a survey of those who voted for Obama and then switched to Trump instead of Hillary. I do agree that the results were oversimplified and consciously or unconsciously bent to fit the bias of those who made the study, i.e. well educated, employed professionals in an academic setting which tends to be a more liberal environment. I am not saying it is right, but this election proved that there is a strong undercurrent against the liberal reforms of the last few decades, but I believe economics played a strong part as well. And in addition, a lot of voters were not really voting for trump, but against Hillary. Lets face it, Hillary was just not a personally appealing candidate, and came with a lot of political baggage. And the Trump campaign certainly ran a masterful job of character assassination, especially for supporters of someone with such a sketchy past himself. And then you have the gun lobby, who were convinced that Hillary was going to come an take all their guns.This might be true, I honestly don't know where the truth is on this. But I'd take a bit of convincing. There are potential complications.
For one, does it matter what the 'bulk of the base' consists of? What determines outcomes is what happens at the margins, what happens with the people you might hope would support the left but fail to do so (including if they just stay at home and don't vote, not just if they vote for Trump).
Secondly I'm a little bit suspicious of these arguments because the case for them tends to be built, and the evidence for them gathered, by the very people who have a bit of a vested interest in saying it isn't about economics - i.e. well-off securely employed commentators and academics who are doing very nicely thankyou with things as they are. Do those people have a strong motivation to look for contrary evidence?
Thirdly, are racial identities and economics entirely separate things? Is it not possible that cultural identity issues become more important to people as hopes of economic improvement decline? Often seems that way to me - everyone gets on with each other much better when there's loads of money sloshing about, smoothing relationships and giving people something else to think about than how much they fear/dislike the 'other lot'.
It's also not necessary for people to be experiencing serious economic difficulty right now for economics to matter, they just have to be losing hope that their position will improve in the long term.
Lots of explanations, lots of finger pointing, everyone analyzing the most esoteric of reasons, all of them pointing to some fundamental flaw in the minds of Trump voters. I guess that makes you feel better, but it's time get over it, Hillary lost. Donald Trump is the President of the United States. Ten thousand study's and surveys aren't going to change that.
It makes total sense when you realize that the people who love to insult the most are the people with the worst cases of self hate caused by being put down themselves as children. All hate and hate is what motivates ridicule of others, is self hate. Self haters seek desperately to off-load their own pain in proportion to the depth of their own.Edit: I do find it amazing though that Trump manages to insult everyone from world leaders to the handicapped, his own government agencies, anyone who disagrees with him, and pretty much anyone he feel like, with the most insulting language possible, and no one seems to care, and it only endears him more to his base.
Learning from history is a necessity, trying to mold it to fit your narrative is mental masturbation without the happy ending.Learning from history is for pussies, am I right?!
Ah yes, that most cogent of Trump appologism , the "Hillary lost" rebuttal.
Actually you lost even by winning , but then again Trump supporters perfectly reflect the mind of our President.
I highly doubt her saying it out loud changed a single vote away from her. Especially when everyone was like "We love Trump because he says what he means!" and "We love Trump because he is willing to say what everyone is thinking!"Not a big fan of clinton, but she clearly pointed out that there were certain 'baskets' of trump supporters, some due to economic issues and feeling their government let them down, some just being regular republicans who would never vote for hillary, and then the 'deplorables' (the racists/sexists/xenophobes). The thing is, Hillary wasn't wrong about that, but she was a fucking moron for actually saying it out loud.
Learning from history is a necessity, trying to mold it to fit your narrative is mental masturbation without the happy ending.