GOP2020: What Becomes Of The Collaborators Post-Trump?
ml1 said:
But I thought the point under discussion has been for the past two years, that liberals drove voters toward Trump by saying mean things about conservatives and rural residents. The midterm results are convincing evidence that all the hand wringing by "centrists" was for nothing. The Democrats won convincingly. Even in the states that gave Trump his Electoral College margin.
I agree.
And to state that the strategy is to persuade those who are persuadable is to state the obvious. The question is, who are the persuadable? I suggest that it is not "the base" but rather independents and so-called "moderates". Additionally the natural Democratic base, minorities and the young, have to be persuaded that voting matters.
LOST said:
ml1 said:I agree.
But I thought the point under discussion has been for the past two years, that liberals drove voters toward Trump by saying mean things about conservatives and rural residents. The midterm results are convincing evidence that all the hand wringing by "centrists" was for nothing. The Democrats won convincingly. Even in the states that gave Trump his Electoral College margin.
And to state that the strategy is to persuade those who are persuadable is to state the obvious. The question is, who are the persuadable? I suggest that it is not "the base" but rather independents and so-called "moderates". Additionally the natural Democratic base, minorities and the young, have to be persuaded that voting matters.
I'm not here trying to justify people making fun of others. When I've written about Trump and his supporters here, I've tried to base my conclusions on what I know from exit polls. Who they are demographically, where they live, etc. I've also read books that try to respectfully describe what's going on among rural U.S. residents like The Left Behind: Decline and Rage in Rural America.
Certainly no one likes being made fun of, so there will be complaints among rural folks about the "elitists" looking down on them. But IMHO it's way more condescending to those people to think that they base their voting behavior on resentment toward elitists' jokes and not on real world concerns. They aren't as much concerned with PC attitudes as they are with the actual fear that their world and their "culture" is disappearing. Which in many ways is really true. The country is becoming more diverse, and people with Latin American heritage are becoming a bigger and more influential segment of our country. It's also the case that rural areas continue to get older, less healthy and less educated as their younger, more educated residents leave for cities and larger towns. It's also true that the businesses that employed people to work with their hands and build things are leaving their areas for other countries.
It's no surprise that a lot of these people resent the people who live in areas that are seen as doing better economically, taking their best and brightest, and imposing a cultural diversity that they don't want. It's also no surprise that they support a man who promised to turn back the clock for them and re-create a world when their communities were "great."
They don't vote the way they do because someone from NJ makes a joke about them on social media. They vote the way they do because they believe the country is leaving them behind. And they aren't entirely wrong. It's just mistaken of them to believe that it's ever possible to go back in time and make things the way they used to be.
LOST said:
And to state that the strategy is to persuade those who are persuadable is to state the obvious.
It doesn’t seem so obvious to me when “Trump voter” becomes a pejorative all by itself. Now, some may see that as a straw man — Who’s writing off Trump voters? — but there appears to be some evidence to the contrary in these MOL discussions.
ml1 said:
But IMHO it's way more condescending to those people to think that they base their voting behavior on resentment toward elitists' jokes and not on real world concerns.
Is it condescending to think that a party could do a better job of addressing their real-world concerns in terms that don’t encourage resentment?
What I meant by "obvious" is that any candidate for public office is going to try to "persuade" people to vote for her. Some are simply not persuadable because for whatever reason they are commited to the other candidate or Party.
As for addressing "real-world concerns" doesn't universal health insurance and free or less expensive college for their children address their actual concerns rather than a wall at the border.
Trump tells people that the danger to them that they can't afford to get sick or that their children won't have better opportunities than they had but that bad people are coming across the border to hurt them. It's the old racist strategy that has always held those people down.
DaveSchmidt said:
ml1 said:Is it condescending to think that a party could do a better job of addressing their real-world concerns in terms that don’t encourage resentment?
But IMHO it's way more condescending to those people to think that they base their voting behavior on resentment toward elitists' jokes and not on real world concerns.
why would it be?
DaveSchmidt said:
LOST said:It doesn’t seem so obvious to me when “Trump voter” becomes a pejorative all by itself. Now, some may see that as a straw man — Who’s writing off Trump voters? — but there appears to be some evidence to the contrary in these MOL discussions.
And to state that the strategy is to persuade those who are persuadable is to state the obvious.
There were Trump voters, and then there's the subset of continuing Trump supporters. Sometimes there is imprecision in describing which group someone is talking about. While there are Trump voters who are persuadable, I think when most people are talking about "unreachable" Trump voters, it's the 40% or so of the country who still think Trump is a great president.
ml1 said:
DaveSchmidt said:why would it be?
Is it condescending to think that a party could do a better job of addressing their real-world concerns in terms that don’t encourage resentment?
Your comment suggested to me that there’s a distinction between consideration of joke resentment and a focus on real-world concerns, with the former concern being condescending. I wondered whether, in your opinion, drawing the two together also risked condescension.
LOST wonders: "As for addressing "real-world concerns" doesn't universal health insurance and free or less expensive college for their children address their actual concerns rather than a wall at the border."
Yes, and those are things that iirc Trump promised during the 2016 campaign, and that are good parts of a Dem platform, to be clearly and repeatedly advocated in campaigns, while pointing out that T has utterly failed at making any progress in those areas, if he's even tried.
I think I am missing the nuances that are being discussed here:
1) Trump is an insult to our intelligence with his blatant lies. I don't see why we cannot make fun of him at all. It's not like he is going to turn into a more moral person just because we stop joking about him.
2) His base, the people that still think he is a great President, really are delusional too. So I don't see why we cannot make fun of them either. Again, I don't think there is anything we can do to change their minds.
3) People that voted for him because they either believed that Hillary was the devil reincarnate, or because they though he would change his ways once he became President, or that he would actually replace Obamacare with something much better, etc., and now realized they made a mistake: they sure did make a mistake, and it might turn out to be quite costly, but they are really the ultimate losers in this case, so there is not much to make fun of anyways.
DaveSchmidt said:
ml1 said:Your comment suggested to me that there’s a distinction between consideration of joke resentment and a focus on real-world concerns, with the former concern being condescending. I wondered whether, in your opinion, drawing the two together also risked condescension.
DaveSchmidt said:why would it be?
Is it condescending to think that a party could do a better job of addressing their real-world concerns in terms that don’t encourage resentment?
I don't see how you could come to that conclusion from what I wrote.
basil said:
I think I am missing the nuances that are being discussed here:
1) Trump is an insult to our intelligence with his blatant lies. I don't see why we cannot make fun of him at all. It's not like he is going to turn into a more moral person just because we stop joking about him.
2) His base, the people that still think he is a great President, really are delusional too. So I don't see why we cannot make fun of them either. Again, I don't think there is anything we can do to change their minds.
3) People that voted for him because they either believed that Hillary was the devil reincarnate, or because they though he would change his ways once he became President, or that he would actually replace Obamacare with something much better, etc., and now realized they made a mistake: they sure did make a mistake, and it might turn out to be quite costly, but they are really the ultimate losers in this case, so there is not much to make fun of anyways.
Everyone is losing now. Or at least that's what the money people think:
If anyone is condescending to the Trump voter, it's Commander Bone Spurs himself, by promising the big beautiful concrete wall (with rebar). "And who's gonna pay for the wall?" "Mexico!" I think it was 30 feet high. Then there's the great middle-class tax cut they all "enjoyed." Also, bringing back "beautiful coal," putting those miners back to work. "I love the uneducated!" Who TF says this to his crowd?
When a man says he could shoot someone on 5th Avenue and not lose his followers, it kinda says something about his POV of the base. He's marveling at their gullibility.
The longer and more outrageous this administration gets, the more resentment builds toward those who led us to this dark place.
The only consolation of this presidency is that his life of crime is now being examined. Anyone who lived in the NYC metro area for years could tell folks what this guy was for all of his adult life.
ml1 said:
I don't see how you could come to that conclusion from what I wrote.
OK. I must've misunderstood.
GL2 said:
The only consolation of this presidency is that his life of crime is now being examined. Anyone who lived in the NYC metro area for years could tell folks what this guy was for all of his adult life.
True
basil said:
GL2 said:
The only consolation of this presidency is that his life of crime is now being examined. Anyone who lived in the NYC metro area for years could tell folks what this guy was for all of his adult life.
True
Yet, the Democratic party establishment was not bothered. Democrats were happy to join his parties, his fetes, etc. They helped him get politically in his real estate endeavors, the getting of governmental contracts, variances.
Their kids went to the same parties, inviting each other to weddings, and so forth. All one big happy family.
BG9 said:
basil said:Yet, the Democratic party establishment was not bothered. Democrats were happy to join his parties, his fetes, etc. They helped him get politically in his real estate endeavors, the getting of governmental contracts, variances.
GL2 said:
The only consolation of this presidency is that his life of crime is now being examined. Anyone who lived in the NYC metro area for years could tell folks what this guy was for all of his adult life.
True
Their kids went to the same parties, inviting each other to weddings, and so forth. All one big happy family.
At least they weren't stupid enough to back him for President. For that, he needed Republicans.
GL2 said:
If anyone is condescending to the Trump voter, it's Commander Bone Spurs himself, by promising the big beautiful concrete wall (with rebar). "And who's gonna pay for the wall?" "Mexico!" I think it was 30 feet high. Then there's the great middle-class tax cut they all "enjoyed." Also, bringing back "beautiful coal," putting those miners back to work. "I love the uneducated!" Who TF says this to his crowd?
When a man says he could shoot someone on 5th Avenue and not lose his followers, it kinda says something about his POV of the base. He's marveling at their gullibility.
The longer and more outrageous this administration gets, the more resentment builds toward those who led us to this dark place.
No one treats the base more disrespectfully than Trump. You may draw your own conclusions as to why they seem to love being pissed on by a conniving liar. My personal theory is that bullies only survive because there are personality types drawn to bullies. This is not healthy.
BG9 said:
basil said:Yet, the Democratic party establishment was not bothered. Democrats were happy to join his parties, his fetes, etc. They helped him get politically in his real estate endeavors, the getting of governmental contracts, variances.
GL2 said:
The only consolation of this presidency is that his life of crime is now being examined. Anyone who lived in the NYC metro area for years could tell folks what this guy was for all of his adult life.
True
Their kids went to the same parties, inviting each other to weddings, and so forth. All one big happy family.
Agree. But it was his celebrity, not his criminal enterprise, that brought them into the same NYC circles.
https://www.thedailybeast.com/trump-was-supposed-to-be-in-jailnot-the-white-house?ref=home
Trump Was Supposed to Be in Jail—Not the White House
You can pinch yourself all you like, but shockingly enough, there will be public schools named after him one of these days.
"And it struck me then: Trump’s face will be on such books, books for children, children like the Boy Scouts he got to boo Obama, for all time. And there is nothing we can do about it. No way to erase it. Placemats. Know what I mean, those kids’ placemats of the presidents? Donald J. Trump. As long as the United States exists and kids still need placemats."
GL2 said:
You can pinch yourself all you like, but shockingly enough, there will be public schools named after him one of these days.
Are there any named after Nixon?
LOST said:
GL2 said:Are there any named after Nixon?
You can pinch yourself all you like, but shockingly enough, there will be public schools named after him one of these days.
2.
http://time.com/4226561/president-richard-nixon-public-schools/
LOST said:
GL2 said:Are there any named after Nixon?
You can pinch yourself all you like, but shockingly enough, there will be public schools named after him one of these days.
Obama... Bush... Clinton.... Reagan...
Eta... Carter
ridski said:
LOST said:2.
GL2 said:Are there any named after Nixon?
You can pinch yourself all you like, but shockingly enough, there will be public schools named after him one of these days.
http://time.com/4226561/president-richard-nixon-public-schools/
The school’s loyalty was rewarded on June 14, 1989, when Nixon paid a visit to Landing and was serenaded by students singing Woody Guthrie’s “This Land Is Your Land.”
Did Nixon or the teachers know Woody's politics or all of the lyrics?
Now that I've asked, I'll bet one of the teachers did.
ml1 said:
I'm not here trying to justify people making fun of others. When I've written about Trump and his supporters here, I've tried to base my conclusions on what I know from exit polls. Who they are demographically, where they live, etc. I've also read books that try to respectfully describe what's going on among rural U.S. residents like The Left Behind: Decline and Rage in Rural America. Certainly no one likes being made fun of, so there will be complaints among rural folks about the "elitists" looking down on them. But IMHO it's way more condescending to those people to think that they base their voting behavior on resentment toward elitists' jokes and not on real world concerns. They aren't as much concerned with PC attitudes as they are with the actual fear that their world and their "culture" is disappearing. Which in many ways is really true. The country is becoming more diverse, and people with Latin American heritage are becoming a bigger and more influential segment of our country. It's also the case that rural areas continue to get older, less healthy and less educated as their younger, more educated residents leave for cities and larger towns. It's also true that the businesses that employed people to work with their hands and build things are leaving their areas for other countries. .
Two-thirds of the votes for Trump came from counties classified as suburban or urban. Why no ridicule or outrage for them? How do you explain their motivation for voting?
For Sale
Free Items
Sponsored Business
Promote your business here - Businesses get highlighted throughout the site and you can add a deal.
I agree 100% that it would be a very bad strategy for Democratic candidates to insult potential voters.
But I thought the point under discussion has been for the past two years, that liberals drove voters toward Trump by saying mean things about conservatives and rural residents. The midterm results are convincing evidence that all the hand wringing by "centrists" was for nothing. The Democrats won convincingly. Even in the states that gave Trump his Electoral College margin.
If the principle is that it's never good to make fun of people who are different that's certainly an admirable one. But it doesn't seem to really be the strong driver of voting behavior that we have been continually warned about. Certainly not strong enough to prevent liberal candidates from winning.