New article on women who voted for Trump
![[Post New]](/jforum/templates/default/images/icon_minipost_new.gif){kind=icon}
Anonymous
You're missing the point. Or maybe just exploiting it in the same way that Trump did. The point is not that a college degree is required for success. It's that a lack of a college degree is being celebrated as a point of pride. Getting an education IS hard work. And many Americans could learn something from the immigrant examples in your post. |
Anonymous
Based on the posts on this thread by Trumpkins, doubtful. |
Anonymous
Yes most Hillary supporters are. |
Anonymous
Go home, you're drunk. |
Anonymous
I don't know what makes you think that considering the cabinet appointments made and the uncharacteristically hard work the Republican-led Congress is putting into dismantling policy. It looks to me like they want to reduce government to rubble and then tell voters they asked for it. Health care is the most glaring example, but environmental and workforce protections are on their way to the curb. |
Anonymous
| I really don't understand why so many people here can't comprehend that most people who voted for Trump, really voted against Hilary, that it has nothing to do with her being a woman. Press has long abandoned any semblance of civility or impartiality either way. The fact that main stream media vilified Trump and he still won, should be a wake up sign that real American people are not fools educated liberals take them for. Why would democratic party run a horse that already lost once before? I know, I know she won the popular vote, but she didn't win the election. I am not a Trumpist at all. |
Anonymous
They voted against Hillary to their own detriment. That's what makes them stupid and the object of ridicule. very definition of cutting off your nose to spite your face.! |
Anonymous
I agree that he doesn't have any particular affinity for them beyond the appreciation they offer him. But the Democrats could have embraced and accepted them too, instead of criticizing them and demeaning them. Many of the uneducated lack the opportunity to go to college. You'd think that would be a ready made group for the Democrats to court. But they preferred to use them as a point of mockery. |
Anonymous
The Democrats were treating lack of a college degree as a moral failing. "The uneducated" can either side with a guy who props them up as an example to emulate, or side with a group who thinks they're morally lacking. Which would you choose, in their shoes? I would choose neither, but I'm not in the group being sacrificed by the Democrats or gained by Trump. |
Anonymous
I think people DO comprehend that people were voting against Hillary. I don't like the way the NYT piece so obviously edited answers, but it did do a good job of showing that voting decisions may have the appearance of being objective - even to the person who made them. But they're actually more emotion than anything and emotions can't be explained well. I thought it was interesting that almost all of the women in the article supported values and policy espoused by Clinton - they're feminist, pro-choice, pro-gay marriage - and that they all felt the same dismay at Trump's behavior that she expressed. But they each pivoted to something negative about Clinton while lauding that very thing in Trump. |
Anonymous
No, that's not true. American culture treats poverty as a moral failing. It's hard to accept the idea that if you don't have wealth it's because you don't deserve it, but that's the gift of Republican policy. If you don't have access to something essential to upward mobility - education, health care, strong social networks - there's nothing left but to devalue those things. It doesn't mean those things are not essential. Now Trump, Republicans and their supporters are in a Catch-22: the supporters have raised the demand for a fix, but their elected leaders have rejected out of hand the fixes that would improve their situation. I think the hope that Trump wants to "shake things up" is well-founded because he has. But his ability to fix things is pretty clearly not up to the task. |
Anonymous
I would disagree. Republican media like Fox and Breitbart spreads non-stop propaganda that the democrats are only in favor of government spending that favors the urban poor, which their audience is trained to interpret as poor blacks. Further, the message is that the white middle class is financing this give away. This audience has no interest in learning about what the policies of democrats actually are. It is actually ingenious. Foster racial warfare so that the working class whites don't realize that it is really the one percent, and even more so, the .01 percent, that benefit when Republicans are in power. If the working and middle class were united, Republican policies would not fly. |
Anonymous
Yes, very true. In any case, the future belongs to the educated, whether one likes it or not, and Trump and GOP can't do a thing about it. This is true no matter whom you vote for. |
Anonymous
Yes, this, and that most people on welfare are white. So when Republicans play this game - and they do it well - what white and working class Americans often assume is that only black/latinos/insert "other" category are the takers of welfare. This isn't true because there are as just as many poor white poeple as other races. Ultimately, it shouldn't matter - of course. But this plays into the skewed narrative that it's just inner city black women on welfare when in fact that's not the case. |
Anonymous
I think this is a good thing, and gives me hope for the future. It was not a rejection of those policies, it was a rejection of HRC, the candidate. This is why it makes sense for some of these Trump voters to participate in the Women's March. (BTW, many people voted for Obama because they liked the man, not necessarily the polices, which to me is equally crazy) It does not make sense to me because I vote based on policies always, but others vote for the person, and of the two people they did not like, they chose Trump. |