NSFW THE TRUMPOCALYPSE

[Moll Flanders]

I was saying on another thread that I read a book called Listen, Liberal and it made me understand more why some people voted for Trump, or didn't even bother to vote. The class angle in the US election had not even occurred to me before that. Before the election I had been seeing black people from the US being interviewed on British TV saying they were voting for Trump and it was really puzzling me. Obviously the class aspect went over my head.

It also occurred to me that the American forums that I spend time on are around 90% upper middle class and that was why I was getting such a biased view of the election from them. The American people on those forums are exactly like the people he was describing in the book, socially liberal and very well educated, so they are probably the precise social group that the Democratic party appeal to. Brexit and Trump both made me realise how much I am ending up in echo chambers and how I am getting such a one-sided view all the time.

I think I'm going to have to start reading different newspapers or something!

Michael Sheen Says He’s Not Quitting, Disputes U.K. News Report

Whew! His fans can relax.

But how much can you call Brexit the will of the people when you have voters who said they had no idea what they were voting for and wanted a do-over?

Oops, wrong thread.

I hadn't even heard about that. I read the other day that he is dating Sarah Silverman, which is irrelevant.

 

[Mischief]

As the piece by Rev. Barber that Amy posted a while ago pointed out, the idea that the election of DT resulted from a revolt by the economically deprived is a fallacy, although a persistent one. As Rev. Barber pointed out, Hillary won all the income levels under $49,000, and DT won all the income levels above $49,000. http://www.nytimes.com/interactive/2016/11/08/us/politics/election-exit-polls.html

I know the "populist uprising" story appeals to many journalists, but the facts don't support the storyline of a pro-DT revolt by the poor.

 

[Mischief]

This piece does a good job of explaining why the inauguration of DT marks the end of American international leadership: The Era of American Global Leadership Is Over. Here's What Comes Next

 

[FortyTwo]

I think it's much more likely that the votes Bump earned were from upper-middle-class people, mostly white, who really wanted to feel victimized even though their lives were pretty comfortable. People who believed a few too many fake news stories about Hillary Clinton (which I will never get - if you really want to hate HRC there are a billion real news stories about awful **** she's done to draw from without inventing child trafficking sex rings or whatever) and really bought into the narrative that Mumps was, as Michael Moore said (and I'm still not sure how I feel about that speech of his), "a wrench they could throw in the system." It's less 'populism' and more 'people enchanted by the idea of populism even though that narrative never actually existed for them.'

No amount of backpedaling or regret on their part, nor news sob stories about the backlash they're facing for their vote, will ever make me feel bad for them in any way. They're not going to get punished enough for this, unfortunately. Any amount of fear they live in as a result of making this awful decision is necessary, and it won't be enough.

 

[Amy SF]

Well, it's all over. It's official.

Electoral College Makes It Official For Donald Trump, Despite Attempts By 'Faithless Electors' | The Huffington Post

We're in for a long nightmare, and I have no idea when it will end, if ever. They'll repeal Obamacare, privatize or get rid of Medicare and Social Security entirely, repeal Roe v. Wade, overturn same sex marriage and abolish other laws protecting LGBTS, and that's just for starters. All progress of the last 50-60 years will be destroyed. And Americans will sit around complaining about it all on social media, and then when it comes time to vote against this nightmare, they'll conveniently find an excuse not to, and then get defensive when they're criticized.

 

[Mischief]

I do think that a lot of journalists seem to be living in an alternate reality. Take, for example, this piece, the author of which somehow thinks that liberals are for the Electoral College. Dear Liberals: Please Stop Pretending the Electoral College Ever Served Any Real Purpose

I don't know a single liberal who thinks the Electoral College is anything other than an outdated anachronism.

 

[Mischief]

Well. Wow.

A new Texas nonprofit led by Donald Trump’s grown sons is offering access to the freshly-minted president during inauguration weekend — all in exchange for million-dollar donations to unnamed “conservation” charities, according to interviews and documents reviewed by the Center for Public Integrity.

And the donors’ identities may never be known.

Prospective million-dollar donors to the “Opening Day 2017” event — slated for Jan. 21, the day after inauguration, at Washington, D.C.’s Walter E. Washington Convention Center — receive a “private reception and photo opportunity for 16 guests with President Donald J. Trump,” a “multi-day hunting and/or fishing excursion for 4 guests with Donald Trump, Jr. and/or Eric Trump, and team,” as well as tickets to other events and “autographed guitars by an Opening Day 2017 performer.”

Trump's Sons Offer Inauguration Access for $1 Million

 

[FortyTwo]

Let the third world war begin, probably.

 

[ledboots]

As the piece by Rev. Barber that Amy posted a while ago pointed out, the idea that the election of DT resulted from a revolt by the economically deprived is a fallacy, although a persistent one. As Rev. Barber pointed out, Hillary won all the income levels under $49,000, and DT won all the income levels above $49,000. http://www.nytimes.com/interactive/2016/11/08/us/politics/election-exit-polls.html

I know the "populist uprising" story appeals to many journalists, but the facts don't support the storyline of a pro-DT revolt by the poor.

Not the poor, who need the social programs, but the lower middle class to middle class, who are struggling to get by, and know their children will probably not do better than they have with the current system.

And I think what the media missed was rural and middle America, the big ole part they fly over when going NY to LA.

From your NYT link above, (sorry I cannot copy the chart.)

Residence

City over 50,000:
Clinton 59%
Trump 35%

Suburbs
Clinton 45%
Trump 50%

Small city or rural
Clinton 34%
Trump 62%

 

[Mischief]

Not the poor, who need the social programs, but the lower middle class to middle class, who are struggling to get by, and know their children will probably not do better than they have with the current system.

And I think what the media missed was rural and middle America, the big ole part they fly over when going NY to LA.

From your NYT link above, (sorry I cannot copy the chart.)

Residence

City over 50,000:
Clinton 59%
Trump 35%

Suburbs
Clinton 45%
Trump 50%

Small city or rural
Clinton 34%
Trump 62%

Yeah, it broke down largely along racial lines. Small cities/rural areas are overwhelmingly white, as are the suburbs.

 

[Moll Flanders]

The class system is so different in the UK, what Americans term as middle class would be considered working class over here.

I can understand why people were angry at the Democratic party now, I didn't get it before as Trump seemed so ludicrous that I didn't understand why people would vote for him. I really wasn't paying attention to what some people were saying before the Trump win. I'm trying to listen to the views of people who voted for Brexit now as well as I wasn't really paying attention to them before the referendum either! I keep thinking that having people polarised into two different teams is not good for anyone in the UK. I'm also hoping that Trump winning will be a wake up call for the politicians in the UK as there are similarities between people in the Rust Belt in the US and people in the North of England.

 

[FortyTwo]

The class system is so different in the UK, what Americans term as middle class would be considered working class over here.

I can understand why people were angry at the Democratic party now, I didn't get it before as Trump seemed so ludicrous that I didn't understand why people would vote for him. I really wasn't paying attention to what some people were saying before the Trump win. I'm trying to listen to the views of people who voted for Brexit now as well as I wasn't really paying attention to them before the referendum either! I keep thinking that having people polarised into two different teams is not good for anyone in the UK. I'm also hoping that Trump winning will be a wake up call for the politicians in the UK as there are similarities between people in the Rust Belt in the US and people in the North of England.

Be wary of sympathizing with the mindset that got Dump elected. Being angry with the Democratic party is one thing. Being so angry with the Democratic party that you vote for an obvious tyrant despite (or even because of) the downright insidious **** he spouts on a daily basis is absolutely unacceptable. It's going to get a lot of people hurt and killed, and it's started doing so already, before the guy is even in office.

Whether or not you interpret this as an attempted populist uprising doesn't matter in the end. I don't care about the motivations of these people. I care that they elected a demagogue who might start a nuclear war by misspelling **** on Twitter and whose every action has been to disparage and disenfranchise already marginalized groups. At best they overlooked it because they knew it wouldn't affect them immediately, at worst they're insidiously evil themselves and they love the guy. Either one is the same.

Also, in either case, the mindset that got Clump elected is the same one that Brexited you guys, and the politicians that supported Brexit are in bed with Crump and vice versa. Whether they were motivated by misguided nationalist values or incredibly gross anti-immigrant rhetoric, the end result is still what it is.

I hope this doesn't come across as rude or overly antagonistic. It's late and this is important to me so I kind of suck at controlling my tone right now. What I guess I'm trying to say is, don't let yourself go down a road where you're sympathizing with white supremacists just because you (understandably) want to be open to peoples' concerns that you hadn't thought of before.

 

[Moll Flanders]

I hope this doesn't come across as rude or overly antagonistic. It's late and this is important to me so I kind of suck at controlling my tone right now. What I guess I'm trying to say is, don't let yourself go down a road where you're sympathizing with white supremacists just because you (understandably) want to be open to peoples' concerns that you hadn't thought of before.

Well, yes, obviously rude and pretty silly too. Sympathizing with white supremacists? I'm not sure how you got that from me saying that I now understand why some people were angry with the Democratic party.

 

[Second Summer]

I hope this doesn't come across as rude or overly antagonistic.

No, just a wee bit uninformed and smidgeon dogmatic Brexit had supporters on the left too, for starters.

 

[Moll Flanders]

There is a difference as well in trying to get more information to try to understand why people think the way they do, as opposed to feeling sympathy for them.

No, just a wee bit uninformed and smidgeon dogmatic Brexit had supporters on the left too, for starters.

It was only a few months ago that I had online people telling me that because I was against Brexit that I hated white British people. I still can't really understand what that was even supposed to mean.

 

[beancounter]

If the Democratic party continues down the path of identity politics, and doesn't get off it's high horse and tone down it's arrogant rhetoric against the "others" it will be a long time before it wins a national election, and take back the states it once held. If this starts to creep into state elections, the Democratic party will become a bit player.

Sanders slams identity politics as Democrats figure out their future

What Bernie Sanders Meant to Say About Identity Politics

 

[Mischief]

And this is why the GOP has managed to gerrymander to the point that it will be decades before they have even a smidgen of a chance of losing control of states that are actually Democratic by substantial margins: progressives/liberals turn on each other so consistently that they can't get **** done.

Even in the face of the catastrophe that is DT, here we see it in a microcosm in this thread.

 

[Mischief]

Now is not the time to engage in internecine squabbling. Now is the time to get, and stay, tough, otherwise what has happened in North Carolina, and in the national election, will continue to happen:

http://www.nytimes.com/2016/12/20/o...ight-region&WT.nav=opinion-c-col-right-region

 

[Amy SF]

Throughout the campaign, and even now, I have been consistently attacked by Bernie supporters for being a vocal supporter of Hillary Clinton, who won the popular vote. In my opinion, that's the equivalent of voters in 1932 being attacked for supporting Franklin Delano Roosevelt because he came from an old moneyed family and wanted to save capitalism, not destroy it. That **** has to STOP, NOW. We know in hindsight that FDR was better for the country than the Republicans (Google "Bonus Army"), and Hillary most certainly would have been better for the country than Trump. Yes, President Bernie Sanders would have been nice, but once Hillary won the nomination, she should have gotten more support on the left than she did get.

 

[beancounter]

Denial isn't just river in Egypt.

Doing the same thing over and over again and expecting different results...well, you know.

Clinton lost, so it's reasonable to assume that the message didn't resonate with enough voters and/or didn't energize enough people.