Nov 2023 Mod notice:
There may be other, more specific, threads about some aspects of US politics, but this one tends to act as a hub for all sorts of related news and information, so it's usually one of the busiest OTC threads.
If you're new to OTC, it's worth reading the Introduction to On-Topic Conversations
and the On-Topic Conversations debate guidelines
before posting here.
Rumor-based, fear-mongering and/or inflammatory statements that damage the quality of the thread will be thumped. Off-topic posts will also be thumped. Repeat offenders may be suspended.
If time spent moderating this thread remains a distraction from moderation of the wiki itself, the thread will need to be locked. We want to avoid that, so please follow the forum rules
when posting here.
In line with the general forum rules, 'gravedancing' is prohibited here. If you're celebrating someone's death or hoping that they die, your post will get thumped. This rule applies regardless of what the person you're discussing has said or done.
Edited by Mrph1 on Nov 30th 2023 at 11:03:59 AM
![]()
Overall, there were two divides: white vs. POC and Baby Boomer vs. Millennial. The white working class factor was decisive, in that it was a factor in certain areas and was responsible for the result in the "Blue Wall," but if, for example, only Millennials voted, Hillary would have dominated utterly, as in 40+ states.
edited 28th Nov '16 1:08:06 PM by CrimsonZephyr
"For all those whose cares have been our concern, the work goes on, the cause endures, the hope still lives, and the dream shall never die."Trump may have inched ahead on race, but had young people and minorities bothered to turn out in even slightly higher numbers in key states, it wouldn't have been enough for him. Apathy was the bigger factor in Trump's win.
edited 28th Nov '16 1:29:41 PM by Rationalinsanity
Politics is the skilled use of blunt objects.Yeah, Pennsylvania, Michigan and Wisconsin was what won it for Trump. Without that, and even with Florida and Ohio, he would still have lost.
But you know, without the votes from baby boomers and white folks across the economic divide, Trump wouldn't have come that close either. He should never have that come close, leave alone win. Fundamentally Trump's campaign was racist and he won people on that appeal, and I think any attempt to realign this with economics separate from the racial question is just wrong. These people are a basket of deplorables...full stop. And the way forward is to win over the undecided and fight back repression of anti-voting laws and maybe find NG Os that help African-American voters get ID for the elections.
When white workers attain higher wages and greater economic status, they can translate this to better neighborhoods and stronger schools. When black workers attain the same, they can’t, at least not to the same degree. Middle-class status, insofar that black workers can reach it, is less stable and more tenuous for them than for their white counterparts. “Even if a white and black child are raised by parents who have similar jobs, similar levels of education, and similar aspirations for their children,” writes sociologist Patrick Sharkey in his book Stuck in Place: Urban Neighborhoods and the End of Progress Toward Racial Equality, “the rigid segregation of urban neighborhoods means that the black child will be raised in a residential environment with higher poverty, fewer resources, poorer schools, and more violence than that of the white child.” Opportunity itself is redlined.
Black and white workers face the same kinds of economic disadvantage: deindustrialization, an eroding safety net, weak wage growth, and poor investment in needed infrastructure. But black workers (and other nonwhite workers) face additional challenges that move their disadvantage from a difference of degree to a difference of kind: residential segregation, discrimination in jobs and housing, and discrimination by lenders and banks, which in turn contribute to unfair and draconian policing, poor and unequal schools, and heightened exposure to impurities in air and water. They need specific and universal solutions. They need a politics that addresses all material disadvantage, whether rooted in class or caste.
- * *
...Mainstream Democrats have set their sights on white voters. But the path forward—the way to win them and energize those voters of color who didn’t come to the polls in 2016—might lie in the insights of black voters and black communities and a larger appreciation of how and why identity matters, in a politics of we kin, blackness in many shades. Against a political movement that defines America in exclusionary and racial terms—as a white country for white people—a renewed Rainbow Coalition is the only defense worth making.
I mean, Wisconsin, Michigan and Pennsylvania were technically what won Trump the election, but let's not forget that Clinton was also ahead in the polls in North Carolina and Florida for most the election, Ohio and Iowa for a good portion of it, made Arizona look like a coin toss, and made Virginia look safe when it actually turned out to be close.
There were problems for her across the board on election night; it might not be a good idea to focus entirely on the three states that ended being the deciding factor.
- Voter Apathy
- Voting Rights Act getting nuked allowed to voter roll culling
- Hillary having a very stormy history in the Rust Belt (yes we know, Automation but the agreed rule up there is NAFTA took the jobs if you ask the Union workers)
- Comey
- Damn E-Mails
- Pennsylvania got by a nasty transit strike that probably impaired votes in Philadelphia
- Establishment vs Outsiderism
- White voters feeling too much focus was being given to minorities at expense of them because of common view that Politics and the Economy as a Zero-Sum Game
- Rhetoric of the National Level Republicans being bruihsed off as huff-and-puff
A lot of things added up. There's no one supreme silver bullet. Just a lot of little things that cascaded into an avalanche at the end.
@Julian-
to your posts over the last few pages.
Despite our disagreements in the ASOIAF/GOT threads, I've definitely gotten a sense that we are on the same page politically and I can't agree enough with you. I've been reading a lot of Jamelle Bouie and I find he's both a great commentator on racism generally as well as a beacon against the line of characterizing anti-racism as elitist identity politics.
Editing for fairness
edited 28th Nov '16 2:16:48 PM by Hodor2
Was thinking of editing my post. I don't know if he's said that directly (although I think he's made some comments to that effect). But I've definitely seen that sentiment voiced fairly openly by various online leftists.
Edit- have edited above post. I actually recall Sanders saying that the Democratic party needs more minorities so I'm not sure where I stand with him. I believe he has used that "identity politics" dogwhistle though. I kind of go between nodding along and then going back to hating him when he starts going on about the white working class and how Clinton wanted people to vote for her solely because she was a woman/that this was the only reason people would vote for her.
edited 28th Nov '16 2:19:43 PM by Hodor2
I get the feeling that Trump is to poor whites what this klanner uncle Matt Riggs was to his son Chuck Riggs; turning a reasonable resentment problem into much more by pandering and outraging.
The problem is, identity politics can get hijacked by lying outrage-mongers keen to assume the very worst of the others both ways, and to spread that view with a shovel.
edited 28th Nov '16 2:27:17 PM by TheHandle
Darkness cannot drive out darkness; only light can do that. Hate cannot drive out hate; only love can do that.So-called "identity politics" is nothing but plain old "Liberty, Equality, Fraternity". It is about every man, woman and child of any religion and race, across class lines, getting a fair shake. Historically the Left were on the forefront of those issues, using that as a platform for social leveling.
The fact is that appeals on equality in such sweeping ways were always painted as "Communist" by the American discourse. Mostly because CPUSA did make many great advances on that front in the 30s-40s until the Democrat Party had to betray them to survive. So people had to try a new tactic to get their voice heard in the America...and Identity Politics became a means to an end. And without identity politics you probably would not have the success of LGBT rights which has led to pressure on corporations like Google and others to take a stand on this.
It's true that the Left historically has ran into problems in asserting a commonality connection with women's rights and African-American voters. Ralph Nader's brain-dead "gonadal politics" comment in 1999 comes to mind, as does his Fifth-Column election campaign that gave us 8 years of Bush. Nader basically tried to assert an equality on economic issues as already existing but refused to deal with the polarization of American interests that made earlier appeals fail on those lines. Bernie, bless him, faced similar issues. Ultimately, everything does come down to the economy, but not in the way people imagine or expect it...fact is America is polarized, and yes it is a problem...but the way to deal with it, is not to say let's move on and not listen to complaints. Fact is you have to listen to everyone.
Fact is American political culture is intellectually hollow, driven by emotions and mass media fallacies. That does cross over political lines unfortunately. That's why in America "Political Correctnes" has this bizarre dual meaning and the opposition to it attracts people on both sides.
Okay honest question for the folks who are saying that one specific group is to blame for the Democratic loss this election, did you already have a negative opinion of that group before the loss?
Because I'm seeing a ton of factors at play here, if one or two for them had been fixed Clinton would have narrowly won, but the Democrats still have about a dozen places where they could improve, even if improving only a few of them would be enough to get a win in 2020 I think it's worth pushing for the full set so as to get a strong mandate.
“And the Bunny nails it!” ~ Gabrael “If the UN can get through a day without everyone strangling everyone else so can we.” ~ CyranThe argument that if only X group had voted things would be different is technically correct, the best kind of correct. With the rust belt being roughly one point ahead for trump any single voting bloc could have mattered. A 1.2 difference would've switched the election. Clinton was around 100K votes from the presidency and with voter turnout barely cracking 53% it's easy to point fingers. At the end of the day the fault lies with Clinton's team for not getting out the vote in the numbers required.
Is using "Julian Assange is a Hillary butt plug" an acceptable signature quote?Even if one ignores the failure of particular groups to turnout and vote for Clinton there's variety in the blame to go around, Sanders for running a long primary, Clinton for ignoring certain demophics, the DNC for not shutting down such an unpopular candidate, Obama for continuing boondoggles like the TPP that hurt democrats, the Blue Dogs for blocking a proper stimulus back in 2008, the media for harping on Clinton's non-scandals for ratings, the Republians for engaging in blind obstruction for 6 years, Bill Clinton for causing Clinton bad press at times with his mistakes (both the tarmac meeting and during the primary to questionable visit to a polling station), Facebook for allowing fake news to go unchallenged, Comey for violating the Hatch Act, etc...
“And the Bunny nails it!” ~ Gabrael “If the UN can get through a day without everyone strangling everyone else so can we.” ~ CyranYou mean the rural white, the ones who are Confederate nostalgics and are full of "guns and religion". The answer more or less is yes. White nationalists, white supremacists, neo-Jim Crow lobbyists and Neo-mudsill. Do I feel that they were thrown under the bus by NAFTA and Neoliberalism...yes they were. They were also thrown under before by the Republican Party who they voted for, and sent Reagan into office who also said, "Let's make American great again". So they fell for that racist dog-whistle trick once...Anyone who has seen Paul Schrader's never-more-relevant-than-now film about union politics Blue Collar can understand the nature of "white rage" and the whole Marxist argument that its meant to keep people divided. I get all that. But I also get the other Marxist argument...first time is tragedy, second time is farce. First time they fell for Reagan, I can understand and feel some compassion for why that happened...second time they fell for Trump, I have lost all sympathy.
But you know the fact is that neoliberalism has affected many people around the world. And many Americans, and it has even affected people in cities. The Occupy Movement began in the cities you know and it promoted a very progressive agenda and as a nature of that, the Democrat party started shifting Left after that. They basically decided on seeing calls for equality and attention paid to racist profifiling of African-American men, that minorities were cutting in their way. I can't forgive that.
Her main reason was a media failure. And she, and the Democrat party, failed to fully attack and see the implications of those Mccarthyite Benghazi and email hearings. The basic idea was stoic determination and let the facts speak for themselves. Se should also have gone after Bernie bros attack on the DNC and those paid speeches which are not really illegal and no worse than anything. I mean the idea that politicians shouldn't make any money is something that even the Incorruptible Maximilien Robespierre attacked. Hillary basically simply took all that stoically maybe because she didn't want to come across as the "hysterical woman" who complains about attacks. We fail to understand how important misogyny played in that campaign and that Hillary didn't quite have the same room for attack as others could. Joe Biden can still be cool Uncle Joe even if he voted for the Iraq War and openly lied about it in the 2012 VP debate with Paul Ryan, but for Hillary that gave her a label as "liberal hawk" which okay is not unfair but the truth is even Bernie Sanders is on board with drone strikes.
They are all American imperialists at the end of the day. The key is to do what Obama does...embrace imperialism but tie up some loose ends like in Iran and Cuba. Anyone who runs for President has to be okay with killing people, at least in the foreseeable future...As good Bertolt Brecht said, "You can only help your luckless brothers/by trampling on a dozen others."
Don't be too insulted about it, but from a German perspective, US politics is a circus. Elections which last for a year? We do this in three month. Campaigns which costs millions? Yeah, we have very specific rules how much a party is allowed to advertise. Person cult? We appreciate our leaders, but we elect parties and their programs, not persons. We also couldn't care less what our politicians do in their private life as long as they don't do anything illegal. We already had a chancellor who was divorced multiple times, a foreign minister who was openly gay and our current chancellor is female, once divorced and doesn't have any children....and she is the leader of the centre right party, not of the left, where female politicians tend to be more common. And yes, a lot of our politicians are kind of ugly, but in turn they are competent in what they do. Also, elected judges? Madness, how is one supposed to be impartial under such circumstances.
My perspective is global but i have been in America for some time so I can kind of get the tensions. US politics is legitimately weird in many ways...like guns and abortion and reproductive rights are actual Serious Business and legitimate platforms for election. It's just weird that this is is an issue in the 21st Century.
You also have a media that is incredibly right-wing. But the worst is the American intellectuals even the ones on Vox and other liberal places. Many of them are historically uninformed. They base their arguments on poli. sci. courses but have no knowledge of global history and so many of them take American imperialism legitimately seriously and don't understand why Putin is doing what he does when that is fairly obvious and foreseeable to anyone with a modicum of knowledge of Russian history and geopolitics. There are exceptions everywhere of course but generally there's stupidity.
Like the mere fact that everyone uses the word "Populism" wily-nily and say that Sanders and Trump are one and the same, when they are in fact not one of the same, and in response they react in outrage at false equivalency between "both parties" by others. I mean the level of false equivalencies you see everywhere and poverty of ideas is breathtaking.

As this article shows
:
Trump won on race.
edited 28th Nov '16 1:01:14 PM by JulianLapostat