Its gonna be President Trump ..!!! ??

[P.O.U.S.theWonderCat]

rahrahrah Wrote:

-------------------------------------------------------

> P.O.U.S.theWonderCat Wrote:

> --------------------------------------------------

> -----

> > You can vote for a candidate without endorsing

> > everything they do and say.

>

> Of course that's true. But you can't really vote

> for a candidate without endorsing the central

> tenants of their campaign.

Why not? I don't think that viewpoint bears out against the reality of how some poeple vote.

[P.O.U.S.theWonderCat]

This isn't the type of view I was talking about, but I found this interesting:

https://www.the-pool.com/news-views/opinion/2016/45/talking-to-my-cousin-who-voted-trump

[red devil]

BrandNewGuy Wrote:

-------------------------------------------------------

> Well, a good friend of mine in California (who

> voted for Clinton) said that on the stump Trump

> banged on and on about the economy, wages,

> manufacturing, infrastructure, tariffs and free

> trade all the time ? far, far more than he did

> about Mexicans and Muslims. And lots of those

> speeches were shown live on TV (as indeed were

> Hillary's), so I suspect many Americans got a

> different perspective from those of us in this

> country who saw very little of that.

>

> Not that I think his 'solutions' make much

> sense...

A friend of mine is visiting his brother and family in California. They all voted Democrat but his brother said there's a general feeling in the country that Obama's presidency hasn't been a success*, that the general population is worse off and struggling to make ends meet, so in the end they voted for change rather than more of the same, which is all that Clinton offered. Which kinda reminds me of that line which I think one of Blll Clinton's aides came up with....It's the economy, stupid

*It should be said that Obama has had his hands tied with a Republican majority in the Senate/Congress, so he was never going to totally deliver what he wanted to...

[P.O.U.S.theWonderCat]

Jenny1 Wrote:

-------------------------------------------------------

> P.O.U.S.theWonderCat Wrote:

> --------------------------------------------------

> -----

> >

> > You can vote for a candidate without endorsing

> > everything they do and say.

>

>

> Absolutely agreed. But doesn't there come a point

> when what someone does and says become so extreme

> that alarm bells need to go off in your head, and

> if they don't, there's something wrong?

>

> I also saw the story that Nigello notes about 'The

> Klan' . Wouldn't people have been concerned about

> voting for a candidate who played to this section

> of the electorate? We're known by the company we

> keep.

I assume so for everyone, but I guess it depends on how much you believe the awful stuff and how much you mistrust the "other guy".

Don't get me wrong, I finding the rise of xenophobia deeply alarming and, having experienced sexual harrassment in the workplace and watched far too many colleagues have the same, I personally find Trump scary. I just don't think it's helpful or accurate to impute views to all of his supporters based on what we think is logical. We're only going to get out of the mess Western society is crawling towards by avoiding tribalism and demonstrating a bit of empathy.

[miga]

rendelharris Wrote:

-------------------------------------------------------

> ???? Wrote:

> --------------------------------------------------

> -----

> > So to sum up the great and good of the EDF...I

> > think it's a great pity the plebs have the

> > vote......yes, pesky democracy eh

>

> Funny, I said absolutely the opposite - don't

> patronise the working class by treating their

> voting choice as just an angry tantrum which is

> someone else's fault, every adult has a vote and

> takes responsibility for how they use it. A

> rightwing maniac becomes president and it seems,

> to some people, that's not the fault of the people

> who voted for him, it's the left's fault really...

It's the perennial false consciousness question. Assuming it was the white working class vote swing* that gave Trump the win, and that Trump will indeed be ultimately bad for them**, options include a) they were misled into making a choice that's ultimately bad for them by Capital b) they're responsible adults and knowingly voted for a racist pussy grabber c) some other more complex option.

As neither a) nor b) are very nice things to say or think about a large group of people, I tend to go with c) - which, as a theme, admittedly doesn't fan the flames.

*But also - half-ish of college graduates and people making >$250,000 voted for him, these people rarely get accused of false consciousness

**we don't know that Clinton would have addressed the economic needs of the poor in the rust belt, or that Trump won't.

[keano77]

I'm beginning to wonder whether the angst caused to many by the results of our referendum and the US election has exposed a serious failing of liberal democracies - namely that generation snowflake and the helicopter parents responsible for producing such safe-space little darlings have been left unprepared for the real world where you get winners and losers and they have difficulty grasping that people hold different views that they may not agree with.

Perhaps we need to introduce disclaimers on voting forms to explain what should of course be obvious to anyone eligible to vote, such as:

In giving my vote for my preferred candidate I agree to accept the rules under which this election/referendum is being conducted. I understand that the candidate I am voting for might not win but I will accept the result irrespective of whether I agree or disagree with the winning candidate's/party's political affiliations/policies/beliefs.

[intexasatthe moment]

What a ridiculous post Keano ,are you extending that logic to opposition parties ?

[intexasatthe moment]

Red Devil - yes I agree about people feeling that Obama'a presidency was rhetoric and that they are still suffering badly .

I read the following on another forum and thought it had the ring of truth .

"Obamacare was a brilliant idea, totally neutered by the Senate and Congress. The end result is not the start of social healthcare but a system which actually costs the working poor and lower middle class more. For instance, it used to be the case in America that most young people not in occupational health schemes used to get the equivalent of "3rd party only" car insurance on an old banger. You bought insurance for the unlikely but massively expensive risk of hospital treatment following a car accident or similar, then paid your way as and when on the cheaper stuff like a course of antibiotics for strep throat. Now you have to pay for insurance - and the co-pays mean you're paying more than if you'd bought the antibiotics outright. Obamacare in practise has actually made healthcare moreexpensive for a lot of the poor. So again, the poor are looking at an outgoing president and saying "it was all talk, it didn't actually make my very hard life any easier."

[JohnL]

red devil Wrote:

-------------------------------------------------------

> Blll Clinton's aides came up with....It's the

> economy, stupid

Surprised that wasn't said well before Bill :)

I still think that will be the judgement on Brexit too

not 'did they stop coming'

[Earl Aelfheah]

If it is about disappointment that Obama was neutered by the senate and by congress, then voting back in the incombants seems at best misguided.

[malumbu]

Interesting perspective from a Brit I know across the pond in Memphis.

Any national vote has any number of groups turning out for different reasons. In any vote you'll have dyed in the wool types of whichever side of the spectrum and then you'll have tepids who turn out when they feel so inspired. In this election it wasn't so much about the reactionaries turning out it was the liberals staying at home. The turnout was hugely lower than 2012 which in turn was hugely lower than 2008. You need only look at the figures. If people want to secure liberal gains they need - as we political scientists say in technical parlance - to get off their arses and vote for it.

After the outcome there's a lot going round here (perhaps in all the world for all I know) about some of the rural left-behinds. It's actually a decent point about groups who have been largely abandoned in traditional communities and how little in practical terms is done to address the issue of change brought about by changes in manufacturing and trade. By the way, although all the talk is about the hillbilly rednecks this is a huge problem in rural black communities too. Before all the manufacturing went to Mexico or China they used to like to build factories in places like Alabama or Mississippi where lesser union regs and cheap cost so of living meant reduced manufacturing costs. Anyway these hillbilly demographics aren't the whole reason the election was lost but it did make a difference.

The bulk of the republican vote has little to do with male privilege. The are huge swathes of fundamental religious folk who will put their reasons for voting as number one "pro-life", number two pro-gun. Despite the ironies implicit in this these people are very real and very prevalent. Also very hard to understand from a European perspective. One thing worth bearing in mind in a nation so very spread out and with a fairly light government support net is the role of the church in providing help and support and basic things like community meeting places. They really are enmeshed in the fabric of - especially rural - life and so the churches have a much stronger cultural prevalence the in Europe whee other structures have largely superseded.

[Earl Aelfheah]

This is interesting: https://itunes.apple.com/gb/podcast/this-american-life/id201671138?mt=2&i=377270248 this American Life episode 600.

[Jules-and-Boo]

Malumbu - thanks for that! Really interesting;

I particularly liked the phrase "Rural left-behinds" Cutting to say the least. Stinging. If not downright nasty.

Assumed definition: "a section of society that no-one wants or gives a toss about, who don't fit in with the glamour and glitz of the First World".

[rendelharris]

I found this graph really fascinating, it basically demonstrates that Trump has done no better than the previous two Republican candidates, he's lucked into a lot of antipathy for Hillary.

*well it would be interesting if I could upload the photo but it's resolutely refusing to do so, sorry!

[malumbu]

This was an edited view but probably reflects British society too. Lincolnshire. There, I have said it.

I think that it is fine to preach from our liberal safe haven, but interesting to hear from those living in the separate world out there.

This is posted purely for debate rather than to inflame emotions!

[P.O.U.S.theWonderCat]

keano77 Wrote:

-------------------------------------------------------

> I'm beginning to wonder whether the angst caused

> to many by the results of our referendum and the

> US election has exposed a serious failing of

> liberal democracies - namely that generation

> snowflake and the helicopter parents responsible

> for producing such safe-space little darlings have

> been left unprepared for the real world where you

> get winners and losers and they have difficulty

> grasping that people hold different views that

> they may not agree with.

Firstly, the right to protest and providing opposition and challenge to the incumbents is a fundamental part of democracy. Judging by your perjorative tone, I'm guessing you are more conservative. Would you expect, upon Labour winning, that the Tories and all their supporters threw their hands up in the air and said "Well that's alright then. The people have spoken. Let's do nothing for the next few years."? If so, you would be supporting a weakening of democracy.

Secondly, when you use terms like "generation snowflake" and "helicopter parents", you are betraying a very narrow-minded point of view. If you had sensible observations to make on the topic, you wouldn't need to resort to perjorative terms and sweeping generalisations. I really do hope you're not one of those people who complains about political correctness, because this is exactly the same thing from a different direction.

And before you write off my opinion because you think I'm on a different side of the political fence, I'm not a Labour supporter.

[P.O.U.S.theWonderCat]

Jules-and-Boo Wrote:

-------------------------------------------------------

> Malumbu - thanks for that! Really interesting;

>

> I particularly liked the phrase "Rural

> left-behinds" Cutting to say the least.

> Stinging. If not downright nasty.

>

> Assumed definition: "a section of society that

> no-one wants or gives a toss about, who don't fit

> in with the glamour and glitz of the First World".

Why assume a negative definition? Promoting class snobbery is hardly helpful.

[Jules-and-Boo]

go ahead POUS-T.W.C.

alternatives with a positive tone.

I agree with Malumbu - definite parallels to the UK where industry has left shadows and areas with low/ little investment.

[rendelharris]

P.O.U.S.theWonderCat Wrote:

-------------------------------------------------------

> Secondly, when you use terms like "generation

> snowflake" and "helicopter parents", you are

> betraying a very narrow-minded point of view.

"Generation snowflake" is such a lazy and meaningless term which is cropping up more and more often. It's the new way of saying "political correctness gone mad" - when Richard Littlejohn uses it in virtually every article you know something's wrong with it. It's so insulting to write off a generation who are actually, from what I've seen in teaching and from working with them as a volunteer, more politically active and more inclined to get involved and volunteer than many of their predecessors.

[jaywalker]

keano77 Wrote:

-------------------------------------------------------

> I'm beginning to wonder ...

but not I fear to think.

[jaywalker]

btw, I see there are rumours that the EU may seek to destabilise brexit by offering voluntary EU citizenship to Europhile UK citizens. Free movement and right of abode, and a vote in EU elections. If the majority of Londoners took this up (with Scotland, and almost certainly Bristol, Manchester and Oxford) that would be quite a force. The London mayor would have, for example, to seek ways of offering reciprocity on labour movement and residency - i.e. seek a very welcome quasi-independence from the reactionary inhabitant of Downing Street. No doubt a pipe-dream but it would be an astute move by the EU and tell May something.

It is interesting, isn't it, that Trump has no interest of any kind in the UK as a trading partner: he does not believe in trade deals, only protectionism. So I wonder just where we think we will be in two or three years time having rather burnt our boats with India last week and been looked at with mild derision by China.

However, no doubt Ruritanians will take heart that we can still beat Scotland at football.

[Jules-and-Boo]

Jaywalker - I can't believe you brought sport into politics! ;-)

[P.O.U.S.theWonderCat]

I'd have said a more accurate definition is those who feel disenfranchised who live in country areas. It may not be positive, but it's more neutral and I'd argue more factual.

[Loz]

This just popped up on my facebook feed. I'd say he's got the whole recent election debacles nailed. It's just over 6 minutes, but it is worth a listen - the first 30 seconds is a bit waffly, but he really gets to the point at about 1.10 in.

 

[Earl Aelfheah]

This: http://www.thedailymash.co.uk/politics/politics-headlines/everyone-to-blame-for-twats-like-trump-except-the-people-who-vote-for-them-20161113117081 (Everyone to blame for twats like Trump 'except the people who vote for them')