691–700 of 1001 posts
It's French Revolution redux just waiting to happen. And it did. People voted Obama as a relative outsider to bring change. He failed and became the insider. People doubled down this time and got a complete outsider.
People that believe this is what happened are going to be disappointed.
We'll know real soon anyway, based on the hiring that his transition team does (they are a bunch of political insiders).
My takeaway from this is that our strategy of "shaming" people into voting a certain way doesn't work. Exit polls seem to suggest that plenty of people understated their support for Trump because they were embarrassed to admit they voted for him. But they still did. In effect, you don't stop people from supporting racism, homophobia, or misogyny by calling attention to it. That only makes them support it quietly. You…
I think we learned that fake news (used to pump up fake issues) is now a legitimate campaign strategy that works even on people who should know better. Trump won on a mountain of fake issues: Immigration: both conservative and liberal economists agree that immigration (illegal or otherwise) does not suppress wages and does not suppress job growth. https://www.cato.org/research/immigration http://business.time.com/201…
Earlier quoted context omitted.
> Hillary focused her entire campaign on why people should stop Trump Until now I thought that wasn't a bad strategy against Trump as he had said and done so many repulsive things far far beyond what I would of thought the voting population would of tolerated. For example, "grabbing women by the p *y" I would of thought would have alienated the entire female voting population. For some reason, some women voters seeme…
But consider, "got 'em by the balls" is a commonly used expression. If Hillary had said that she had got Col Ghaddafi "by the balls" no-one would have batted an eyelid. It certainly would not have alienated the entire male voting population. The double standard meant that focussing on this one line, undermined Hillary's campaign.
Now that the voices of the disenfranchised blue collar workers have been heard, what actually can be done to help them? I'm less worried about the accusations of racism, etc. because it appears to me a majority are voting because their livelihoods have been lost and, despite economics saying globalization will bring new jobs, they aren't showing up in the critical areas where they are needed. So, what policies can be…
You can do what the democrats have talked about, which we have successfully done in Nordic countries which is to spend a lot of money on re-educating the workforce and making sure those at the bottom get decent skills. I grew up in a rustbelt like industrial town in Norway. We has shipyards, glass factory, paper mill, textile industry, lock systems etc. Almost all of it got closed down and moved overseas as I grew up…
It is the height of snobbery to move the lesser skilled jobs out of the country and tell everyone they need to be smarter. There will always be a distribution of skills and it is not for the well educated to say "you just need to be like us". All the US needs to do is stop signing 900 page "free trade" agreements and start adjusting import taxes to bring manufacturing back. Call it what you will, but taking care of your own first is not a bad thing.
Now that the voices of the disenfranchised blue collar workers have been heard, what actually can be done to help them? I'm less worried about the accusations of racism, etc. because it appears to me a majority are voting because their livelihoods have been lost and, despite economics saying globalization will bring new jobs, they aren't showing up in the critical areas where they are needed. So, what policies can be…
I remember an MIT economist Zhou Lin said this would be one of the big problems of our generation. I suspect Basic Income would have helped in the interim.
My takeaway from this is that our strategy of "shaming" people into voting a certain way doesn't work. Exit polls seem to suggest that plenty of people understated their support for Trump because they were embarrassed to admit they voted for him. But they still did. In effect, you don't stop people from supporting racism, homophobia, or misogyny by calling attention to it. That only makes them support it quietly. You…
>they were racist, sexist, or Islamophobic This is a big issue here, and something that I don't feel that many democrats seem to understand. It wasn't a race issue, it was an immigration issue since many illegal immigrants have taken American jobs. It isn't sexist to acknowledge differences in the genders. It isn't islamophobic to see cultural issues with Islam that would cause integration issues, especially with a l…
This sums up pretty much every political debate ever.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
> Hillary focused her entire campaign on why people should stop Trump, at the expense of talking about why she should be president. I couldn't disagree more. This campaign was all about emotion, not rationality. Apparently facts don't matter and that's very hard to deal with.
What I find truly amazing is how people say "RIP Democracy" (not all of them), when it were the people of the US who elected Trump, didn't they? Also that the media is totally disconnected with the ground reality, I know it is in my country, it is more in the US apparently.
...then yes, your democracy might as well be dead.
I think the election of Trump is also a backslash against the PC, SJW, safe-space, trigger-warning, micro aggression tendencies that have been spreading in the U.S. for the last couple of years. This has become too much and millions of Americans are fed up with it, they have now spoken out.
I don't see how. The millions of Americans that voted for Trump are not the people that subscribe to /r/The_Donald or spread dank memes. PC, SJW, etc... had no presence in the mainstream election, and it was the rural mainstream that won Trump the election. Not pepe & dank memes.