In my own ordering, here's how I see it:
#1 The Democratic Machine, which must go
#2 Hillary Clinton
#3 Older people
#4 Women
#5 Hispanics
#6 Blacks
#7 Rural folks
#8 Millennials
We need a new and more responsive Democratic party that (a) does away with a patronage/crony system that rewards people for their work for the party with backroom support and (b) fully vets its nominees, eliminating those with major exploitable flaws like those which dogged Secretary Clinton.
Then there's Clinton herself, a person who's never enjoyed a lot of love and has used her power and position to advantage in terms of enjoying privileges and consideration unavailable to ordinary folk.
Older people, especially working class religious folks who it's been said, uncharitably (but with much truth) want to live in 1952 not 2016. They feel men should lead and be breadwinners, women should follow and make sure dinner is on the table when the hubby gets home. Is there a little racism there as well, especially in that yearning for 1952? Sure. However, we are still the same nation who elected Barack Obama and view him as one of the most popular of Presidents as he leaves office.
Speaking of women, they failed to show up in the expected numbers to ensure the first woman President. Many women, especially Christians, as I just said, believe that men are more suited to leadership and women more suited to support roles.
Most disappointingly, perhaps, was the lower-than-expected support of Hispanics, nearly 1/3 (29%) of whom voted for Trump. This despite his depiction of Mexican undocumenteds as rapists, murderers, and drug dealers. It turns out that many Hispanics agree with Trump. Also, those Hispanics who went to great trouble and expense to become legal citizens don't always sympathize with those wanting to get in the back door for free.
Many blacks, clearly, feel the Dems hae been taking them for granted. I doubt if many voted for Trump. More likely, a lot of them just opted out of the election entirely.
Rural folk who farm or are dependent upon farmers for their livelihood live on the razor's edge. They think people in Washington D.C. don't think much about them. Also, the great rural midlands, The Bible Belt, is where conservative, traditional values reign supreme.
Finally, clearly a lot of millennials opted either to stay home or to support a third party candidate. Bernie probably would have lost, too, and losing elections is just the way it is. As they get older, they'll realize that they have to share the country with people who disagree with them. With people who are, to put it bluntly, wrong. So it goes.

Views: 402

Reply to This

Replies to This Discussion

This British dude really drives the point to home. 


CNN's Fareed Zakaria's GPS, Global Public Square raised the prospect that Trump won because he paid attention to the great midlands between the population strips on the East and West Coasts of America as well as to the great farmlands existing in almost every state. By ignoring these people, they felt they had little alternative but to give Trump a try.

As an aside, several years ago I drove with my father from his home in the Cleveland area to a friend's home in rural Western Indiana. I was astonished as we drove along to realize that most of the way we were driving past farmland, mostly field after field of corn. The people who man these farms live either on farms or in small towns where they depend on the farmers for their income.

Referring to these people, Zakaria said that they feel forgotten. TV shows tend to take place on the East or West coast, and almost always in urban settings. To the family sitting in front of their TV in rural Ohio, Iowa, or Nebraska, it sometimes feels like they don't exist. And when they are depicted, they are ignorant hayseeds.

Clinton, Zakaria said, left them with little choice but to vote for Trump, despite his sexism, racism, crassness, etc., because he was the one who seemed to pay attention to them and their wants and desires.

Some of these small-town folks live in one-industry towns such as mining towns. They like their way of life and can't imagine anything else. Trump promises to give them their way of life back. Ditto for displaced factory workers. Clinton really never even hinted at a plan to bring their jobs back.

Forgetting the Great Midwest and really having nothing much to offer the Rust Belt, cost the Dems a lot of votes.

His bullying and bellicosity aside, Trump had a better strategy. A dishonest strategy, perhaps, because he's unlikely to delivery on his promises. But since he'll always have someone or something to blame for his incompetency, he may even get a second term.

Too true.

Clinton was honest in trying to explain that some jobs are simply obsolete here...and that workers will need new skills to adapt to the new economy.

Trump just tells them he'll make some calls, and they all get their old jobs back, with raises paid for by Mexico.


Trump must know that you can't pay Americans $25/hr for assembly line jobs and make products that can compete with products made in Asia, or by robots.

Sanders played a role perhaps...

@Robert - not nearly as big a role as Hillary.

Hilly C is the same Hilly C she always was...and, until Trump did his usual character assassination based upon innuendo, such as denying birth certificates, global climate change, that Hilly should go to prison, etc....everyone was fine with Hilly.

Sure, Saunders had a very loyal following...as fervent as Trump's...and many of his followers stayed home, but few would vote for Trump, and, they typically went independent.

There is nobody to blame for the expression of democratic will. However, the pc left have become too smug and sanctimonious in their own self importance. The hypersensitive language police (sjws, feminazis etc) are now worse than the christians.

You now have the cultural appropriation Nazis, for example, who for example object to white people with dreadlocks or cornrows, for example I wonder, am I doing something bad, cultural appropriation-wise if I make some Thai curry at home?

People are tired of walking on broken glass whenever they make any sort of reference to a cultural group that some of that group (often a minority) claim to feel sensitive about.

I remember a wonderful and beautiful piece Katy Perry put on with a Japanese theme where she wore a gorgeous komono, carried a Japanese parasol, on a set that mimicked Japanese architecture. She got criticized for cultural appropriation, but when a reporter went out to get the views of Japanese college students, they all thought it was wonderful and a tribute to their culture. 

There's a movement to make sports teams stop using Native American tribe names or even the word "Indians" (my hometown's baseball team) because it's supposedly racist, but often when Native Americans are interviewed, they don't see the problem. They have bigger concerns. LOL (At the same time, I'd like the Indians to change their name and stop using their Chief Wahoo mascot, which IS racist because it's a kind of parody of a Native American. Minimally, they could change their name to something a lot more general, like "Tribe.")


MORE sanctimonious?

And, where does self importance come into play in avoiding hurting the feelings of minorities/not making fun of cripples, etc?

The right is just as PC, they just have different issues they are sensitive to.  Mostly their OWN feelings being hurt.

A Muslim who says Happy Holidays to the clerk instead of Merry Xmas is viewed as an egregious attack on their values...and they rise up in outrage to protect their right to make the Muslim say Merry Xmas.

So, sure, the PC thing is out of hand and taken to ridiculous extremes, but, by both the left and the right.  Its just a thing now a days.

A politician in Trenton, NJ was forced to resign when he advised the board to be niggardly with the upcoming budget.

Even after explaining that it was a Scandinavian root word that means thrifty, and has zero to do with race/black people, etc...they STILL demanded he resign, because the word SOUNDED LIKE he said nigger.

This has also happened in Washington, and other places, Dems and Republicans alike, both over-reacting.

And, its not blame for the democratic will, its blame for the electoral collage results, and, the dismal voter turnout that meant that MOST Americans did not express their democratic will...they kept it to themselves.

According to the popular vote, the democratic will was to elect Hilly C. 

According to the Republican Gerrymandered voting district lines, Trump was elected via the electoral collage.

If the Dems who voted Independent had voted for Hilly, she's be prez elect now.

They did not, and, despite droves of Repubs who stayed home, refusing to elect Trump, enough showed up to squeeze out the turd of a win.


Its akin to being in a ship that is in a storm, the captain is washed overboard, and you are heading for a rocky shoreline that will bust the boat to pieces....

...and two guys are arguing over who gets to steer, and ask for a vote from the crew, and most of the crew says they don't think either is that good at steering, and goes to bed...

...instead of just voting for the guy who sucks less to steer.

The hypersensitive language police (sjws, feminazis etc) are now worse than the christians.

I was going to say similar to TJ. The right gets just as butthurt over generalizations as the left.

So some people on both sides generalize the other side as "Yeah, they're all worse than blah blah over there, and we the only ones who are really important!".


© 2021   Created by Rebel.   Powered by

Badges  |  Report an Issue  |  Terms of Service