Election Results

[Baruch]

That is true.  But the same constitution has a built-in mechanism that allows for change (I think the founders thought the constitution should be a living document, not something cut in stone)--so the electoral college can be changed or even gotten rid of.

The White House can be got rid of, if we are going to think outside the box.  Go to a parliamentary system like Britain, then Rep Ryan would be our PM ;-)

[Cavebear]

That is true.  But the same constitution has a built-in mechanism that allows for change (I think the founders thought the constitution should be a living document, not something cut in stone)--so the electoral college can be changed or even gotten rid of.

The original rules allowed only white male landowners to vote.  They matterred most.  Then white male non-landowners to vote after the Civil War.   Then (theoretically and sort of legally) black males.  Then women.

[Baruch]

The original rules allowed only white male landowners to vote.  They matterred most.  Then white male non-landowners to vote after the Civil War.   Then (theoretically and sort of legally) black males.  Then women.

Correct ... and they should have kept things as they were (in regards to voting).  The landless proletariat are a menace.  Of course as Jewish, I wouldn't be White enough to vote in the South, even if I was a landowner.

As pointed out elsewhere ... the President isn't anyone's Representative.  Neither is either Senator.  Your Congressman in the House is that.  People are so unhappy with Congress, they try to make the President into their Representative.  Fix Congress, then you fix that misbegotten motivation to idolize the White House.

[Cavebear]

Correct ... and they should have kept things as they were (in regards to voting).  The landless proletariat are a menace.  Of course as Jewish, I wouldn't be White enough to vote in the South, even if I was a landowner.

As pointed out elsewhere ... the President isn't anyone's Representative.  Neither is either Senator.  Your Congressman in the House is that.  People are so unhappy with Congress, they try to make the President into their Representative.  Fix Congress, then you fix that misbegotten motivation to idolize the White House.

You do slip and reveal your true believes sometimes,  LOL!  You wish for days when States chose the President through the Senate (STATES).  When the elite landowners ruled.  *sigh*

[Baruch]

You do slip and reveal your true believes sometimes,  LOL!  You wish for days when States chose the President through the Senate (STATES).  When the elite landowners ruled.  *sigh*

I have no dog in the fight ... I hate politics ... but lately this is mostly an alt-left web site ;-)

You know nothing about me, and I keep it that way.

[Cavebear]

I have no dog in the fight ... I hate politics ... but lately this is mostly an alt-left web site ;-)

You know nothing about me, and I keep it that way.

You think to keep it "that" way.  Yet what you do not expose deliberately, you expose unintentionally.  I understand you better than you think.

[Baruch]

You think to keep it "that" way.  Yet what you do not expose deliberately, you expose unintentionally.  I understand you better than you think.

And my tin foil hat receives both AM and FM ;-)

[Hydra009]

I read an interesting piece about white voters without a college education and their role in the election.  They've been declining as a percentage of the electorate but have swung heavily to the right

Trump won non-college whites by 14 points more than Romney, a modern day record. Just as important, the working class voters Trump carried by such huge margins were heavily concentrated in the Rust Belt states of Wisconsin, Ohio, Michigan, Iowa and Pennsylvania â€" all states carried by Obama in 2012 and lost by Clinton in 2016. Together, these state cast 70 Electoral College votes.

Trump’s voters were situated in a way that allowed them to exercise far more influence on the outcome in the Electoral College than their overall numbers would suggest, allowing Trump to sweep across the Rust Belt to victory.

In another postelection analysis, published on Nov. 15, Teixeira argues that the conservative victory on Election Day will prove short-lived: “In the end, the race will be won by change â€" as it always is.”

By 2032, Teixeira writes, “we are far more likely to view the 2016 election as the last stand of America’s white working class, dreaming of a past that no longer exists.”

[Baruch]

It is the intention of the Left to eliminate White folk, starting with jobs White folk might have.  Though they have done a good job of eliminating most of those African-American jobs in Detroit ... collateral damage?

So yes, it isn't surprising that White folks are pissed ... they have been very forgiving, until this month.  When most Americans realize that the Left wants to eliminate jobs for every American ... the Left might get hurt.  The Union Of American Reservations will be at hand ;-(

[Hydra009]

It is the intention of the Left to eliminate White folk

I've apparently hidden my self-destructive tendencies quite well.  Also, I apparently harbor racist genocidal views utterly at odds with my avowed egalitarian stance.  Does that make any sense to you?  Cause it sure doesn't make any sense to me.

So yes, it isn't surprising that White folks are pissed ... they have been very forgiving, until this month.  When most Americans realize that the Left wants to eliminate jobs for every American ... the Left might get hurt.  The Union Of American Reservations will be at hand ;-(

Well, globalization is the real thing to be pissed at, and that cuts across party lines.  It's not like the Republicans are any more scrupulous about outsourcing jobs overseas than the Democrats, especially not the turd sandwich whose products are often made overseas.

There is some truth to that in that poor white people, particularly in the Midwest, have been hurting economically and want someone to blame.  And the Dems have held the presidency for the last 8 years, so it's all their fault.  I don't agree with that, I think it's too simplistic and reality of the situation is that those industrial jobs are leaving no matter who's in office, but whatever.

The part that I absolutely despise is this "feeling of betrayal" that the article describes, "discrimination against whites" and "special status of blacks is perceived by almost all of these individuals as a serious obstacle to their personal advancement".  Being upset because you're down and out is one thing, but being upset that someone else isn't held down by racist practices to boost you up is a whole 'nother story and kills any sympathy I might've had for their plight.

If these people want to go full conservative because they're unhappy with minorities being treated like human beings rather than second class citizens, then good fucking riddance.

[reasonist]

The median income of Trump voters is $ 71,000/year. The unemployment rate is down to 4.9%. In economic terms, that is considered full employment. As Steven Pinker points out, we live in the most peaceful times in human history. So what are people angry about? Where does the frustration come from? Sometimes I think that there is a healthy portion of paranoia in the public discourse. Everything is a conspiracy, the White House is run by the Kremlin, Clinton wanted to confiscate all guns, and so on.
The problem with the last election is the people who stayed at home. Trump got something like 25% of eligible votes. 75% did not want Trump in the White House, but the 50% of voters who couldn't be bothered to get off the couch because they didn't like Clinton, contributed to his win.

[Hydra009]

The median income of Trump voters is $ 71,000/year. The unemployment rate is down to 4.9%. In economic terms, that is considered full employment. As Steven Pinker points out, we live in the most peaceful times in human history. So what are people angry about? Where does the frustration come from?

Good point.  If I recall correctly from one of the debates, Trump gave a dire assessment of the state of jobs in the Midwest.  I looked it up, and I've gotta say, I'm not convinced.



Granted, there are areas that haven't done so well, like Detroit and Flint.  And the coal industry didn't exactly go gangbusters in the past 8 years (though that might change as the coal industry might finally be free of regulatory tyranny to voluntarily provide massive amounts of "clean" coal on the cheap)  But the big picture is a way less of a "disaster" than Trump has made it out to be.

You're right, a lot of this perception might just be Trumped up bullshit - the perception of hardship more than actual hardship.

[GSOgymrat]

The median income of Trump voters is $ 71,000/year. The unemployment rate is down to 4.9%. In economic terms, that is considered full employment. As Steven Pinker points out, we live in the most peaceful times in human history. So what are people angry about? Where does the frustration come from? Sometimes I think that there is a healthy portion of paranoia in the public discourse. Everything is a conspiracy, the White House is run by the Kremlin, Clinton wanted to confiscate all guns, and so on.
The problem with the last election is the people who stayed at home. Trump got something like 25% of eligible votes. 75% did not want Trump in the White House, but the 50% of voters who couldn't be bothered to get off the couch because they didn't like Clinton, contributed to his win.

I've been thinking about this a lot but reluctant to discuss it with other people. Angry people don't want their anger minimized or told it is unjustified. Still, I think this "make America great again" is simply propaganda and a false "golden age" narrative that has been trotted out for generations. By my estimation, compared to other periods in American history, we are in relatively good shape. The economy is in relatively solid, unemployment is low, crime is down, gasoline is cheap, America is not involved in any major wars, terrorism is more psychological than lethal, more Americans have access to healthcare, poverty rate is stable, more people have access to free information and communication than any other point in human history, innovation is high. Even though there is a lot of conflict about civil rights objectively blacks, women and LGBTQ people have it better than ever before. I have theories why people are dissatisfied, which I'm not prepared to discuss, but I do think that some people just don't appreciate history and just how bad things could be.

[Mike Cl]

Good point.  If I recall correctly from one of the debates, Trump gave a dire assessment of the state of jobs in the Midwest.  I looked it up, and I've gotta say, I'm not convinced.



Granted, there are areas that haven't done so well, like Detroit and Flint.  And the coal industry didn't exactly go gangbusters in the past 8 years (though that might change as the coal industry might finally be free of regulatory tyranny to voluntarily provide massive amounts of "clean" coal on the cheap)  But the big picture is a way less of a "disaster" than Trump has made it out to be.

You're right, a lot of this perception might just be Trumped up bullshit - the perception of hardship more than actual hardship.

This is a great chart.  And charts are a good thing to use when giving info to the masses.  They are visual and easy to read when done correctly.  Why did not HRC use these much more and attack all the lies Trump made about the economy???  Democrats never take the Rep. head on--I do not understand that.

[GSOgymrat]

This is a great chart.  And charts are a good thing to use when giving info to the masses.  They are visual and easy to read when done correctly.  Why did not HRC use these much more and attack all the lies Trump made about the economy???  Democrats never take the Rep. head on--I do not understand that.

There is a good article in the New York Times today that touches on that topic.

The Right Way to Resist Trump

http://www.nytimes.com/2016/11/18/opinion/the-right-way-to-resist-trump.html?smid=fb-share

... Mr. Berlusconi was able to govern Italy for as long as he did mostly thanks to the incompetence of his opposition. It was so rabidly obsessed with his personality that any substantive political debate disappeared; it focused only on personal attacks, the effect of which was to increase Mr. Berlusconi’s popularity. His secret was an ability to set off a Pavlovian reaction among his leftist opponents, which engendered instantaneous sympathy in most moderate voters. Mr. Trump is no different.

We saw this dynamic during the presidential campaign. Hillary Clinton was so focused on explaining how bad Mr. Trump was that she too often didn’t promote her own ideas, to make the positive case for voting for her. The news media was so intent on ridiculing Mr. Trump’s behavior that it ended up providing him with free advertising. ...

The Italian experience provides a blueprint for how to defeat Mr. Trump. Only two men in Italy have won an electoral competition against Mr. Berlusconi: Romano Prodi and the current prime minister, Matteo Renzi (albeit only in a 2014 European election). Both of them treated Mr. Berlusconi as an ordinary opponent. They focused on the issues, not on his character. In different ways, both of them are seen as outsiders, not as members of what in Italy is defined as the political caste. ...