New article on women who voted for Trump

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:They're stupid. What did you expect? I know several female Trump voters and the commonalities are white and stupid (thought they were smart with their BAs from no names, though). You can't squeeze blood from a stone; your expectations of these women are off base.

And you, my dear, exemplify one of the reasons I did not vote for HRC. You couldn't be more elitist if you tried. It's unfortunate that you consider yourself so much smarter than everyone else. Not to mention, embarrassing.

I like being elitist. Is that a bad word? I'm educated, make a lot of money, live in an expensive house - I am all the things that you thought you were getting if you voted for Trump. The sad part is, he likes people like me. Did he appoint any working class people to his cabinet? Hell no.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:These women are desperate. They want a man to take control and take care of them. They see Trumpmas that man.

Wow, do you have that backwards. We don't want or need anyone to take care of us. We aren't the ones with the *constant* victim complex.

Maybe you aren't, but the people who gave him the presidency do.

[Anonymous]

I'm a fan of the NYTimes, but this article was terribly written. The excerpts were so disjointed they didn't make sense. It doesn't change the fact that several of the subjects contradicted themselves but the bias toward making them look . . . nonsensical was way too obvious.

NPR did a better job with A Trump Swing Voter Looks Ahead.

This subject says she voted twice for Obama, is not a racist and supports LGBT rights. But she thinks Trump will bring back jobs.

A few other good segments from NPR about what's on the minds of Trump voters:

http://www.npr.org/2017/01/01/507693919/coal-country-picked-trump-now-they-want-him-to-keep-his-promises

http://www.npr.org/2016/12/13/504829671/in-ohio-coal-country-job-prospects-lie-with-neither-coal-nor-trumps-promises

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:They're stupid. What did you expect? I know several female Trump voters and the commonalities are white and stupid (thought they were smart with their BAs from no names, though). You can't squeeze blood from a stone; your expectations of these women are off base.

They were each irrational, had low-tier jobs, and two of the younger ones were fat and slovenly, but Imm sure they would think PEOTUS would never give them the Rosie O'D 'fat pig' treatment. So they were by and large the exact LMC stereotype that liar posters on this board tried to disclaim ("DH and I have HHI of $800K, both STEM PhDs, and we love Trump." Funny how no one of that caliber was interviewed....)

To the dickpleats calling Obama 'metrosexual' - I'm sorry that a man of normal weight, on his first marriage, with a grad school degree,
is your idea of limp manhood, while a Pan-Cake coated fat fuck with pale yellow cotton candy growing out of his scalp and a lowly undergrad degree is your idea of big-wanged glory. Sad.

Nice post. Not angry, bitter, or delusional at all. As for the women in the article, you are seriously naïve - or just stupid- if you actually think the NY Times would interview high HHI, well-educated women who voted for Trump. Not on your life. That wouldn't fit their liberal, pro-HRC slant at all, now would it? We're all supposed to believe that only middle and low-class voters went for Trump. No way would any major news outlet (NYT, WashPo, HuffPo, etc.) interview anyone who doesn't fit with their narrow vision of the "Trump voter." And you know it.

Guess what? The women on this board who state they have high HHI and multiple degrees AND voted for Trump aren't lying. It's you who simply refuses to believe anything other than the stereotype liberals love to push.

[Anonymous]

I don't look for your admiration. You are right, Trump isn't in my class. My mother would die if I associated with people like him. I don't have to celebrate. I don't need anything. I will do great under his administration. I don't care if you laugh at me. I would never be in a place with you to laugh at. I don't know too many women in corp board rooms who would admit that they even voted for Trump. I know lots of Republican woman who are as horrified as me. This isn't partisan, this is Trump.

[Anonymous]

So funny seeing Trump voters trying to post smart or pithy comments.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:I'm a fan of the NYTimes, but this article was terribly written. The excerpts were so disjointed they didn't make sense. It doesn't change the fact that several of the subjects contradicted themselves but the bias toward making them look . . . nonsensical was way too obvious.

NPR did a better job with A Trump Swing Voter Looks Ahead.

This subject says she voted twice for Obama, is not a racist and supports LGBT rights. But she thinks Trump will bring back jobs.

A few other good segments from NPR about what's on the minds of Trump voters:

http://www.npr.org/2017/01/01/507693919/coal-country-picked-trump-now-they-want-him-to-keep-his-promises

http://www.npr.org/2016/12/13/504829671/in-ohio-coal-country-job-prospects-lie-with-neither-coal-nor-trumps-promises

NPR, lol lol lol.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:They're stupid. What did you expect? I know several female Trump voters and the commonalities are white and stupid (thought they were smart with their BAs from no names, though). You can't squeeze blood from a stone; your expectations of these women are off base.

And you, my dear, exemplify one of the reasons I did not vote for HRC. You couldn't be more elitist if you tried. It's unfortunate that you consider yourself so much smarter than everyone else. Not to mention, embarrassing.

And there it goes...your post exemplifies my point, and you are too stupid to see it.

The thing is... your post had no point. So, there's that.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:So funny seeing Trump voters trying to post smart or pithy comments.

Kinda sad isn't it? They actually have the hardest time with PC when it's turned on them. Very thin skinned.!

[Anonymous]

The interesting thing is that Trump support is soft. Many people want jobs and don't care for his antics. They are not ride or die supporters. When the jobs don't come, they won't put up with his stupid tweets.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:So funny seeing Trump voters trying to post smart or pithy comments.

I'm sorry we're preoccupied getting ready for the inauguration. Winning!

Ha ha. All 200 buses, but 2000 for the women's march?

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:I'm a fan of the NYTimes, but this article was terribly written. The excerpts were so disjointed they didn't make sense. It doesn't change the fact that several of the subjects contradicted themselves but the bias toward making them look . . . nonsensical was way too obvious.

NPR did a better job with A Trump Swing Voter Looks Ahead.

This subject says she voted twice for Obama, is not a racist and supports LGBT rights. But she thinks Trump will bring back jobs.

A few other good segments from NPR about what's on the minds of Trump voters:

http://www.npr.org/2017/01/01/507693919/coal-country-picked-trump-now-they-want-him-to-keep-his-promises

http://www.npr.org/2016/12/13/504829671/in-ohio-coal-country-job-prospects-lie-with-neither-coal-nor-trumps-promises

NPR, lol lol lol.

What? You don't share in the hope of cracker plants? It's what got Ohio democrats voting for Trump.

[Anonymous]

Wow. This article really triggered some Trumpers!

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:They're stupid. What did you expect? I know several female Trump voters and the commonalities are white and stupid (thought they were smart with their BAs from no names, though). You can't squeeze blood from a stone; your expectations of these women are off base.

They were each irrational, had low-tier jobs, and two of the younger ones were fat and slovenly, but Imm sure they would think PEOTUS would never give them the Rosie O'D 'fat pig' treatment. So they were by and large the exact LMC stereotype that liar posters on this board tried to disclaim ("DH and I have HHI of $800K, both STEM PhDs, and we love Trump." Funny how no one of that caliber was interviewed....)

To the dickpleats calling Obama 'metrosexual' - I'm sorry that a man of normal weight, on his first marriage, with a grad school degree,
is your idea of limp manhood, while a Pan-Cake coated fat fuck with pale yellow cotton candy growing out of his scalp and a lowly undergrad degree is your idea of big-wanged glory. Sad.

Nice post. Not angry, bitter, or delusional at all. As for the women in the article, you are seriously naïve - or just stupid- if you actually think the NY Times would interview high HHI, well-educated women who voted for Trump. Not on your life. That wouldn't fit their liberal, pro-HRC slant at all, now would it? We're all supposed to believe that only middle and low-class voters went for Trump. No way would any major news outlet (NYT, WashPo, HuffPo, etc.) interview anyone who doesn't fit with their narrow vision of the "Trump voter." And you know it.

Guess what? The women on this board who state they have high HHI and multiple degrees AND voted for Trump aren't lying. It's you who simply refuses to believe anything other than the stereotype liberals love to push.

Oh, *do* go get serviced, you truly need it. None of the above is remotely bitter or delusional - these UMC female voters are so ashamed of themselves that they won't share their real names with the paper of record. That's it. You know it, I know it, and more fundamentally, those women themselves know it. To have voted for Trump is to have aligned with right-wing racist extremism, low-information decision making, and wholesale irrationality, and you, I and they all bloody well know that. They don't want to be in the same article as the woman who thinks it's 'concerning' that Hill killed Vince. Because that's feces-throwing crazy, and so is that woman, and you don't want that to be your peer group - but that's the peer group, unfortunately. The perilously undereducated.

You, I and they damned well know the exclusion of all of these rich, exquisitely educated women is because the women are ashamed - not because WaPo, NYT, etc., refuse to highlight them. You are deeply delusional if you don't think the media WANT that story. They WANT to interview the Betsy DeVos who actually *earned* her money and *earned* an impressive degree, instead of marrying into a MLM family's fortune. They WANT to interview the modern day Nancy Kissinger, or Nancy Kissinger herself, who is willing to publicly say why someone phoning Taiwan is great for geopolitics. And maybe get over your paranoia about news outlets. No one's out to get you, as no one is interested in you.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:I'm a fan of the NYTimes, but this article was terribly written. The excerpts were so disjointed they didn't make sense. It doesn't change the fact that several of the subjects contradicted themselves but the bias toward making them look . . . nonsensical was way too obvious.

NPR did a better job with A Trump Swing Voter Looks Ahead.

This subject says she voted twice for Obama, is not a racist and supports LGBT rights. But she thinks Trump will bring back jobs.

A few other good segments from NPR about what's on the minds of Trump voters:

http://www.npr.org/2017/01/01/507693919/coal-country-picked-trump-now-they-want-him-to-keep-his-promises

http://www.npr.org/2016/12/13/504829671/in-ohio-coal-country-job-prospects-lie-with-neither-coal-nor-trumps-promises

NPR, lol lol lol.

What? You don't share in the hope of cracker plants? It's what got Ohio democrats voting for Trump.

Can't wait for the funding to be pulled from this leftist rag station.

Pulled from where? They get their funding from listeners and membership is way up. They're more balanced and thorough than any other media outlet, speaking to more regular people from all across the political spectrum. They've also had a noticeable uptick in Republican politician voices on in the last few months.

If anything, it's where I've been most able to pull some understanding and empathy. Something I can't manage to find reading/hearing bitter voices like yours.

I suppose sniping at people feels better, though. There are enough of us out here to keep public radio going.