Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Trump was put over the top by fed up people in, among other places, PA, MI, and WI. It might be a good idea to learn about their experiences, especially like their decades-long descent into very unpleasant circumstances. Trump offered them both a roll of the dice on something different and a chance to give the middle finger to those who prospered and were indifferent to their suffering. None of this assures he can help them, but that's where it's at.

The fed-up people will be standing there staring at their hands wondering why mining jobs haven't shown up on their doorsteps. And the wealthy will prosper and business will go on as usual. Bread and circuses for the fed-up so they stop making Trump feel uncomfortable.

Understand many of those fed up folks voted for BHO twice, check the vote totals as this is abundantly clear.

BHO was also a roll of the dice. And thanks to BHO the wealthy prospered and business went on as usual. You can disagree with the Trump voters who put him over the top, but I ask where were you all these years?

Anonymous wrote:There are many components to the Trump coalition- most importantly of ALL the non-voters who did not come out for Hillary.
But in the mix of the Trump voters I see two groups that are in direct opposition to each other:

1) The anti-goverment extremists--> these are those who would have voted for Cruz and would never never ever vote Democratic

2) the pro-goverment as long as it benefits ME types. --> these are for example the votes that hate Obamacare because the Medicaid expansion was not big enough and did not cover them. They are there and they are many. These are also those who liked Bernie Sanders.

You can entice 1 and 2 at the same time during the campaign, but I think you can't really please them both while governing.

I don't know, this coalition has been voting GOP for a while now. I think it's why the Congressional Republican strategy has been obstruct and do nothing while blaming all ills on Obama. It's harder to do when the POTUS is also Republican, because it doesn't leave an obvious scapegoat. But I have confidence that they will find a way to make all ills the fault of Pelosi, Schumer, and of course Hillary Clinton. It's truly mind-blowing that this works, but it so clearly does.

There are many components to the Trump coalition- most importantly of ALL the non-voters who did not come out for Hillary.
But in the mix of the Trump voters I see two groups that are in direct opposition to each other:

1) The anti-goverment extremists--> these are those who would have voted for Cruz and would never never ever vote Democratic

2) the pro-goverment as long as it benefits ME types. --> these are for example the votes that hate Obamacare because the Medicaid expansion was not big enough and did not cover them. They are there and they are many. These are also those who liked Bernie Sanders.

You can entice 1 and 2 at the same time during the campaign, but I think you can't really please them both while governing.

These people?

Anonymous wrote:Trump was put over the top by fed up people in, among other places, PA, MI, and WI. It might be a good idea to learn about their experiences, especially like their decades-long descent into very unpleasant circumstances. Trump offered them both a roll of the dice on something different and a chance to give the middle finger to those who prospered and were indifferent to their suffering. None of this assures he can help them, but that's where it's at.

Oh please. In Trumpland, indifference = expanding health care, tax cuts, affordable college, increased minimum wage....face it, only a low information voter could set out looking for economic policies supporting the working and middle class and say, "yeah, GOP, that's the ticket!"

And let's not forget, the working class actually voted for Clinton. It's only the white working class that seems to have a peculiar, race-based "economic anxiety."

And I'm not saying Trump voters don't feel this way - they all seem very convinced their resentment is purely economic and not at all race-based - but as with most things Trump-voter-related, it is inconsistent with reality.

Anonymous wrote:Trump was put over the top by fed up people in, among other places, PA, MI, and WI. It might be a good idea to learn about their experiences, especially like their decades-long descent into very unpleasant circumstances. Trump offered them both a roll of the dice on something different and a chance to give the middle finger to those who prospered and were indifferent to their suffering. None of this assures he can help them, but that's where it's at.

I know a lot about these people (even worked among them and am from there), and this is an over-simplification. There are many people in these states who have also faced economic devastation and voted for Hillary. The margins in these states were razor thin. Increasingly, to me the only narrative that continues to stick is the racial resentment one. Exit polls suggest that terrorism and immigration were the two most important issues to Trump voters, not economics. Trump's policies on these issues is xenophobic at their core, designed to keep "others" out. At the same time, the fewer the immigrants and minorities in a county the more likely it was to vote for Trump. This is suggestive that their fear of "others" is more ideological than based on real damages they've faced from immigrants.

I don't know. We can dance around in circles and try to find ways to justify the votes of Trump voters, or we can recognize them for what they are. I don't wholly dismiss people who hold these resentments, though. We *all* harbor racial biases, including me (ethnic minority with mixed-race children). It has been wholly ineffective for liberals to dismiss all Trump supporters as irredeemable racists. That being said, I don't really know how you counteract a leader who plays on people's basest fears and resentments.

Anonymous wrote:Trump was put over the top by fed up people in, among other places, PA, MI, and WI. It might be a good idea to learn about their experiences, especially like their decades-long descent into very unpleasant circumstances. Trump offered them both a roll of the dice on something different and a chance to give the middle finger to those who prospered and were indifferent to their suffering. None of this assures he can help them, but that's where it's at.

Yes, people rolled the dice hoping for something different, but I think the source of the decline goes back 30+ years. Longer than that if you can consider racism as something that helped weaken the working class, which it did.

Anonymous wrote:Trump was put over the top by fed up people in, among other places, PA, MI, and WI. It might be a good idea to learn about their experiences, especially like their decades-long descent into very unpleasant circumstances. Trump offered them both a roll of the dice on something different and a chance to give the middle finger to those who prospered and were indifferent to their suffering. None of this assures he can help them, but that's where it's at.

The fed-up people will be standing there staring at their hands wondering why mining jobs haven't shown up on their doorsteps. And the wealthy will prosper and business will go on as usual. Bread and circuses for the fed-up so they stop making Trump feel uncomfortable.

Trump was put over the top by fed up people in, among other places, PA, MI, and WI. It might be a good idea to learn about their experiences, especially like their decades-long descent into very unpleasant circumstances. Trump offered them both a roll of the dice on something different and a chance to give the middle finger to those who prospered and were indifferent to their suffering. None of this assures he can help them, but that's where it's at.

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:He's really just the candidate of the Moral Majority / Jerry Fallwell type-whites, who bitterly cling to religion, guns, and so-called family values.

Not bright enough to come up with a response of your own so you just decided to plagiarize Pres. Obama.

Not bright enough to come up with a response of your own so you just decided to plagiarize right-wing talking points.

Anonymous wrote:He's really just the candidate of the Moral Majority / Jerry Fallwell type-whites, who bitterly cling to religion, guns, and so-called family values.

Not bright enough to come up with a response of your own so you just decided to plagiarize Pres. Obama.

Yes,OP. You're right.

You're delisional.

He's really just the candidate of the Moral Majority / Jerry Fallwell type-whites, who bitterly cling to religion, guns, and so-called family values.

I'd always viewed Trump as a "horse of a different color" who just defies all categories and pulls mostly (but surely not 100%) of the low-info voters who don't really follow politics but thought he was funny on TV. But he's obviously got more support than that. I'm wondering if the other category of support he draws is basically the Tea Party crowd. They'd vote for any bomb thrower over an establishment Republican. Between those two groups (plus other pockets of support), Trump got enough support to win the fractured primary. But now it all falls apart in the general election, because the radical right-wing Tea Party represents the viewpoint of only a relatively small but committed sliver of America, and the low-info voters only carry a candidate so far (especially if they fall away as their info grows).

If this is sort of correct, then Trump may seem like a bigger sea change for the GOP than he really is. Maybe he's really just the latest manifestation of the Tea Party, who looked more powerful than he was because of his high Q rating. If so, then after this election, the low-info voters will disband, and the GOP will still be stuck in the same deadlock between radical Tea Party and establishment Republicans that it's faced for several years.