.

[bush_cheney2004]

16 minutes ago, Bonam said:

 

Anyway, I think the point is that the demographic we're talking about doesn't want all this government aid you mention. They don't want food aid and social services and employment insurance. These are the things they feel their tax dollars (when they have jobs to pay taxes with) are being wasted on.... A message that promises them good solid manly jobs again (which is Trump's message even if he has no plan for making it happen), on the other hand, is exactly what they want to hear. 

 

Bingo !    I think you understand the dynamic very well, and I note that you actually reside in the United States.

Americans are anti-government on many things, and there was a time when criminals were held in higher regard than anyone on the "dole".

Illegal immigrants and refugees only incense them more....Trump taps into that anger.

Edited October 14, 2016 by bush_cheney2004

[Bonam]

8 minutes ago, cybercoma said:

I started to type up a reply but Argus's first sentence summed it up precisely. It's not the liberal or urban elite who are the source of their problems, it is indeed the corporate elite.

As for white privilege and institutional racism, these are realities but there are some what people who are certainly not reaping the benefits of that privilege. People of colour tend to have it that much harder because the colour of their skin is an additional barrier on top of their economic suffering in most cases. This is how problems get compounded and is why intersectionality is important to understand. Being poor is definitely a barrier to success, being poor and black is multiplicative.

But I don't want to get too far off the topic of trying to understand the specific issues faced by people in the heart of Trump territory by discussing whether white privilege and institutional racism exist. They're irrelevant to the point at hand, which is that they're being taken advantage of by corporate elite. Yet, even if they blame the corporations, they blame the "liberal elite" for ignoring them, all while voting to dismantle the government because they feel it doesn't help them. Their anger should be directed at the corporate elite instead, imo.

I agree it's not completely aligned with the topic here but I would not underestimate the degree to which such rhetoric puts off a lot of blue collar types (and a lot of other people too). While it doesn't necessarily explain enthusiastic support for Trump, the presence of such rhetoric and the extent to which this demographic finds it offensive largely explains the antipathy that these people feel for liberals, liberal causes, and the Democratic party. 

As for anger towards corporations... why? These people love their self sufficiency, which comes from working jobs in factories, mills, mines, etc (where they still exist). That means they see their livelihood as coming from the success of these industries. And when these industries disappear they don't blame the people that ran them, they blame the people that they perceive to have caused the environment (taxes, regulations, international trade, etc) that caused this disappearance. 

[eyeball]

5 hours ago, bush_cheney2004 said:

 

Bingo !    I think you understand the dynamic very well, and I note that you actually reside in the United States.

Americans are anti-government on many things, and there was a time when criminals were held in higher regard than anyone on the "dole".

Illegal immigrants and refugees only incense them more....Trump taps into that anger.

The problem is that these same Americans have stood by while their government doled out their economy to even more highly regarded criminals.

Trump has merely tapped into the same stupidity.

[Moonlight Graham]

7 hours ago, Argus said:

Oh I don't deny there's a measure of contempt by the urban elites towards the rural and blue collar types. But that's not really much of a problem since the two groups rarely interact.

Not a problem?  This is exactly what caused the US civil war, and they interacted much less back then.  It's ideological/political/media warfare between the 2 groups.

[Moonlight Graham]

7 hours ago, Bonam said:

Anyway, I think the point is that the demographic we're talking about doesn't want all this government aid you mention. They don't want food aid and social services and employment insurance. These are the things they feel their tax dollars (when they have jobs to pay taxes with) are being wasted on for the favorite pet victim classes of the liberal elite. They take pride in self sufficiency and just want there to be jobs. A message that promises them more welfare programs and social services will completely not resonate, ever, it's completely the wrong message. A message that promises them good solid manly jobs again (which is Trump's message even if he has no plan for making it happen), on the other hand, is exactly what they want to hear. 

Exactly.  This is a big reason why Bernie Sanders just couldn't muster the popular support over Hillary, he was simply too left-wing and socialist for even most Democrat voters.  You look at the stats of the primaries and he got really crushed by Hillary in the more southern states.  Voters just can't support those vast social welfare policies even though Sanders is an otherwise attractive candidate. America is not Europe or Canada.  It takes a crisis the likes of the Depression and WWII to get social reforms like that put in, and even then they're not liked.

[Moonlight Graham]

1 hour ago, eyeball said:

The problem is that these same Americans have stood by while their government doled out their economy to even more highly regarded criminals.

Trump has merely tapped into the same stupidity.

Trump and Hillary are leading Americans over the cliff (a group collaborative project several decades old).

Unfortunately the general public are so damned unaware of what's really happening that things might not get better until they've gone over.

[bush_cheney2004]

2 hours ago, eyeball said:

The problem is that these same Americans have stood by while their government doled out their economy to even more highly regarded criminals.

Trump has merely tapped into the same stupidity.

 

Such stupidity has served the U.S. very well.   That's how it got to be the largest economy in the world.  Even the Canadians beg for the U.S. corporations to invest in their country too.  

[Argus]

16 hours ago, Bonam said:

Anyway, I think the point is that the demographic we're talking about doesn't want all this government aid you mention. They don't want food aid and social services and employment insurance. These are the things they feel their tax dollars (when they have jobs to pay taxes with) are being wasted on for the favorite pet victim classes of the liberal elite. They take pride in self sufficiency and just want there to be jobs. 

Most people do, but how do you get jobs when the skill-set you command is for jobs which have disappeared? What you need is retraining so you can do some other kind of job, and yes, you need some financial support in the meantime. All of that takes money the Republicans have been unwilling to pay.

[Argus]

16 hours ago, bush_cheney2004 said:

 

Government does not exist to propagate the social welfare state.  

Government exists for a lot of reasons, but we're talking here about economic prosperity. If you sign a trade deal which is going to cost a lot of factory workers their jobs it seems incumbent upon you to also offer to supply retraining to those workers in another industry so they can work and pay taxes instead of be unemployed. This is only smart policy. Likewise if a new technology is throwing millions out of work you, as a society, can either shrug and ignore it, leaving them out of work, or you can step up and offer retraining so they can get back to work in some other capacity and start paying taxes again. You don't make money without paying money. Skills training is investing in these people so you earn more from them in the long run.

[Argus]

16 hours ago, Bonam said:

As for anger towards corporations... why? These people love their self sufficiency, which comes from working jobs in factories, mills, mines, etc (where they still exist). That means they see their livelihood as coming from the success of these industries. And when these industries disappear they don't blame the people that ran them, they blame the people that they perceive to have caused the environment (taxes, regulations, international trade, etc) that caused this disappearance. 

Thus the ignorance, and Trump's "I love the uneducated" claim. It's rarely something as simple as regulations or trade that causes a business to go under. It's usually bad management or competition. And speaking of cheap imports, I wonder if those people want to abandon Wal-Mart and its seven dollar toasters. I doubt it.

You know it used to be the height of blue collar sentiment to join and be loyal to your union, too. Thirty years of anti-union propaganda and anti-union legislation by Republicans bought and paid for by the corporate elites have reduced union strength to its lowest ebb in many, many decades. So long pensions, so long sick leave, so long vacation pay, so long safe work places and health care. So long being able to afford more than basic necessities while the CEO gets into his limo and drives away with hundreds of times your pay. Meanwhile, the special tax favors the corporatists have bought from their politicians has transferred more and more of the tax burden onto the middle class while transferring more and more of the actual wealth onto themselves.

[Hal 9000]

I found the article to be patronizing of these people, like they "just don't get it", they don't see the big picture like liberals do.  

You know what Trump supporters want?  It's quite simple really, they just to be left alone.  They want to go to work (most of them), build their monster trucks, ride their Harleys, watch football and Nascar, go to the gun range, fly their flag and perhaps go to church every once in a while.  

I think the seeds for the Trump revolution began with the Bill Clinton presidency.  I think "affirmative action" was a problem, political correctness, NAFTA eventually became a problem, the housing crisis and wall street was an issue that began in the Clinton years that eventually burst during Bush's tenure, and terrorism became front page news during the Clinton years.  Not to mention the Clinton scandals.  With Bush we saw 9/11 happen and with that Bush entered into what most people call an illegal war, the bubble burst and it seemed that the Bush administration cared for nothing more than than the war in iraq, the US spending trillions of dollars on the middle east, while regular people were losing everything at home.  Businesses leaving or shutting down ad the revelation that corporations were in bed with politicians.  

Obama!  Obama was going to provide a change you can believe in.  Many of these people saw a fresh face in the political world, he wanted to keep business in the US, invest in business, get the ball rolling again (Canadians were actually worried that he would protect US interests to the extent that it would hurt Canada's economy), Obama would make it right with the middle east, get out of a losing war, improve health care and would mend racial fences.  Instead, with Hillary at his side, he proved weak and ineffectual.  The real world didn't buy into the old "hey man, lets all just get along" schtick.  In between rounds of golf, he half heartedly tried to stand up to Syria and pushed "regime change" in Syria, Libya and Egypt meanwhile Russia grew back to superpower status (as Romney predicted).  Healthcare was/is a disaster, ISIL grew and we watched beheadings on TV, business didn't come back and the economy was slow. Blacks are shooting each other in the streets at an alarming rate, The IRS is found to to targeting republicans and Tea party members, Obama is seen to provoke racial violence and intolerance toward christian values and his big concerns seem to revolve around "safe spaces" and who is allowed in what bathroom.

Hillary.  Hillary represents the worst of the Clinton era with her scandals and back room deals, the worst of the Bush era with her willingness go to war and the worst of the Obama administration in regards to foreign policy, religion and liberal ideology with sanctuary cities and immigration (or lack there of). And, Trump supporters now know that everybody is on the take, they know how incestuous the Clinton circle is and know that the media is carrying the ball for her.  Hillary has been running for the presidency for 40 years, and has bought and sold to get there, she has backstabbed and thrown everyone under the bus (maybe literally) and has changed her views depending on the donations and public polls.  We know she is crooked, what we don't know is just how many people around her are on the take and how many people are terrified to cross her.

Liberals can call Trump supports dumb or stupid and patronize them all day long (and they do), but really they're not, they're not racists and xenophobes, they're not deplorable, they're just fed up and they want to get back to watching football - without seeing Kaepernick disrespect their anthem.  

Essentially, the Clintons and Obama have created Trump and his supporters.

Edited October 15, 2016 by Hal 9000

[cybercoma]

6 minutes ago, Hal 9000 said:

I found the article to be patronizing of these people, like they "just don't get it", they don't see the big picture like liberals do.

What is something specific in there that made you think that?

[GostHacked]

43 minutes ago, Argus said:

Most people do, but how do you get jobs when the skill-set you command is for jobs which have disappeared? What you need is retraining so you can do some other kind of job, and yes, you need some financial support in the meantime. All of that takes money the Republicans have been unwilling to pay.

With manufacturing the jobs went south to Mexico, and west to China ect. Cheaper labour, and the corps don't care at all, as long as their margin of profit increases all the time, and at the expense of practically everything else, and at the same time, government essentially facilitating that downward spiral with notions of 'free trade' agreements.

However I see part of the problem is being stuck in the left-right ideology. You are stuck on the right, and some are on the left, and I am looking at both sides and want to slap all of you out of your trance.

 

[Topaz]

On TV, after one of Trump's gathering, a reporter asked  one woman how can u support Trump after all the  videos and the women coming forward. The woman said  it time for change and she doesn't believe all the news reports and that the media who support Clinton are setting Trump up. We've seen this before  in other elections and the people are tired of the  fraud and the lies being told. Seems they want change and perhaps they are  tired of the same politicians running, the people are losing trust in their government , especially the latest  e-mails that said Obama DID know of Clinton private -emails when he said he didn't know.

[Wilber]

I'm beginning to get worried about what might happen after this election. A Trump win would be a disaster and if he gets thumped by Hillary, it will be a misogynists worst nightmare. He got beat by a girl.

Will he try to calm the waters if he loses or will he fan the flames? Given his history and what we see from him every day, there is every reason to believe it would be the latter. If that is the case, what are some of his supporters capable of? Not a nice thought.

[cybercoma]

12 minutes ago, Topaz said:

We've seen this before  in other elections and the people are tired of the  fraud and the lies being told.

What lies exactly? Are you saying Trump was lying when he said he likes to grope women and just kiss them when they resist? Was he lying when he told a 10 year old girl he would be dating her in a few years? These are the words out of his own mouth. The women who have come forward are only corroborating what he himself said.

[Hal 9000]

17 minutes ago, cybercoma said:

What lies exactly? Are you saying Trump was lying when he said he likes to grope women and just kiss them when they resist? Was he lying when he told a 10 year old girl he would be dating her in a few years? These are the words out of his own mouth. The women who have come forward are only corroborating what he himself said.

Youre derailing your own thread.

[cybercoma]

1 minute ago, Hal 9000 said:

Youre derailing your own thread.

It is off topic, but I'm asking Topaz to clarify what she means. So if anyone is derailing the thread, it's her.

[eyeball]

 

17 hours ago, Bonam said:

 

 

As for anger towards corporations... why? These people love their self sufficiency, which comes from working jobs in factories, mills, mines, etc (where they still exist). That means they see their livelihood as coming from the success of these industries. And when these industries disappear they don't blame the people that ran them, they blame the people that they perceive to have caused the environment (taxes, regulations, international trade, etc) that caused this disappearance. 

Their perception is out to lunch.  They also blame immigrants and foreigners.  As far as the most useful morons in our society are concerned corporations are just poor victims too.

[Hal 9000]

14 minutes ago, eyeball said:

 

Their perception is out to lunch.  They also blame immigrants and foreigners.  As far as the most useful morons in our society are concerned corporations are just poor victims too.

You see cyber, this is the sense I get from the woman in the article.  Eyeball clearly doesn't have the same knack for wordplay as she does, but the sentiment seems the same.  The idea almost completely disregards their issues and places it squarely on their anger, bigotry and their misinterpretation of who is responsible for their problems.  Nothing new here.

As an edit; she spent 5 years and talked to only 60 people and regurgitated the same liberal talking points that many of us could've predicted.  She leaned nothing.  Congratulations lady!

Edited October 15, 2016 by Hal 9000

[eyeball]

There was nothing to learn - their anger, bigotry and misinterpretation remains as inexplicable, especially to them.

A better question for Arlie Hochschild is why do the people who would seem to hurt the most from government intervention on behalf of corporations keep voting for more of the same? 

They're just plain stupid is the only explanation. 

[cybercoma]

38 minutes ago, Hal 9000 said:

You see cyber, this is the sense I get from the woman in the article.

That's fine but I'm asking you to point to something specific in the article that gives you that sense. Otherwise, we're just talking about your feelings instead of why you feel that way.

[cybercoma]

29 minutes ago, eyeball said:

There was nothing to learn - their anger, bigotry and misinterpretation remains as inexplicable, especially to them.

It's about being proudly self-sufficient. They feel the government is lining up against them to undermine their self-sufficiency. They're wrong but it doesn't matter that they're wrong. It's what they believe and so they make electoral decisions based on that.

[msj]

1 hour ago, Wilber said:

I'm beginning to get worried about what might happen after this election. A Trump win would be a disaster and if he gets thumped by Hillary, it will be a misogynists worst nightmare. He got beat by a girl.

Will he try to calm the waters if he loses or will he fan the flames? Given his history and what we see from him every day, there is every reason to believe it would be the latter. If that is the case, what are some of his supporters capable of? Not a nice thought.

Agreed. 

Here we see what some are capable of: domestic terrorism.  

https://www.buzzfeed.com/salvadorhernandez/militia-men-arrested-in-alleged-plot-to-bomb-kansas-mosque?utm_term=.qi9BRqAgMA#.ix46Lw5Vn5

 

Although I don't know if they support Trump or not I'm willing to bet they are no fans of Clinton. 

[bush_cheney2004]

3 hours ago, Argus said:

Government exists for a lot of reasons, but we're talking here about economic prosperity. If you sign a trade deal which is going to cost a lot of factory workers their jobs it seems incumbent upon you to also offer to supply retraining to those workers in another industry so they can work and pay taxes instead of be unemployed. This is only smart policy.

 

Then clearly you "support" Trump's rhetoric to abandon NAFTA and never ratify the TPP.    Let Canada and Mexico fight it out.