Trump voters fear diversity

Recent Forum Topics Forums The Public House Trump voters fear diversity

Viewing 22 posts - 1 through 22 (of 22 total)
  • Author
    Posts
  • #66892
    Avatar photonittany ram
    Moderator

    “In short, our analysis indicates that Donald Trump successfully leveraged existing resentment towards African Americans in combination with emerging fears of increased racial diversity in America to reshape the presidential electorate, strongly attracting nativists towards Trump and pushing some more affluent and highly educated people with more cosmopolitan views to support Hillary Clinton. Racial identity and attitudes have further displaced class as the central battleground of American politics.”

    Link: https://www.thenation.com/article/fear-of-diversity-made-people-more-likely-to-vote-trump/

    • This topic was modified 7 years, 7 months ago by Avatar photonittany ram.
    #66894
    Avatar photozn
    Moderator

    Link: https://www.thenation.com/article/fear-of-diversity-made-people-more-likely-to-vote-trump/

    It’s a fascinating debate and will continue IMO.

    We find that opinions about how increasing racial diversity will affect American society had much more impact on support for Trump during the 2016 election compared to support for the Republican candidates in the two previous presidential elections. We also find that individuals with high levels of racial resentment were more likely to switch from Obama to Trump, but those with low racial resentment and more positive views about rising diversity voted for Romney but not Trump.

    In short, our analysis indicates that Donald Trump successfully leveraged existing resentment towards African Americans in combination with emerging fears of increased racial diversity in America to reshape the presidential electorate, strongly attracting nativists towards Trump and pushing some more affluent and highly educated people with more cosmopolitan views to support Hillary Clinton. Racial identity and attitudes have further displaced class as the central battleground of American politics.

    Though on this bit: Racial identity and attitudes have further displaced class as the central battleground of American politics.

    I don’t think one “displaces” the other, since the 2 are completely tied together. I think the emphasis can shift from time to time but the dynamic is, they are bound together.

    Which is why the same author says this: pushing some more affluent and highly educated people with more cosmopolitan views to support Hillary. In that statement class/race are intersecting. But since the authors don’t directly discuss that intersection it just shows up their essay in spotty ways.

    #66896
    waterfield
    Participant

    Trump voters fear diversity? Well-not all do. At least not in my neck of the woods. Most people I know who own their own business voted for the guy for one simple reason: they think he will lower their corporate tax rate and allow them to either buy more toys or expand their business. None of them appear to have any negative attitudes toward other ethnic groups. Their votes were simply -in their mind-a matter of economics. If they could use a diverse population in their own businesses they would-and from what I see-they have. But then again they are fairly well educated and would be considered “upper class”-whatever that means.

    • This reply was modified 7 years, 7 months ago by waterfield.
    #66899
    Avatar photozn
    Moderator

    Trump voters fear diversity? Well-not all do. At least not in my neck of the woods. Most people I know who own their own business voted for the guy for one simple reason: they think he will lower their corporate tax rate and allow them to either buy more toys or expand their business. None of them appear to have any negative attitudes toward other ethnic groups. Their votes were simply -in their mind-a matter of economics. If they could use a diverse population in their own businesses they would-and from what I see-they have. But then again they are fairly well educated and would be considered “upper class”-whatever that means.

    And I’m sure that’s all true. Ar the same time, I happen to know people who fit the description in that article too, and that personal knowledge combined with real research supports what the writers are saying.

    In fact it is a widely researched and very grounded fact.

    Nothing in what you say undermines it, either. It’s just that different groups voted for him with different motives and views. It can be (and in fact is) both things. One thing does not exclude the other.

    The individuals you know aside. Which would only represent one small aspect of all this.

    #66900
    Avatar photonittany ram
    Moderator

    Trump voters fear diversity? Well-not all do. At least not in my neck of the woods. Most people I know who own their own business voted for the guy for one simple reason: they think he will lower their corporate tax rate and allow them to either buy more toys or expand their business. None of them appear to have any negative attitudes toward other ethnic groups. Their votes were simply -in their mind-a matter of economics. If they could use a diverse population in their own businesses they would-and from what I see-they have. But then again they are fairly well educated and would be considered “upper class”-whatever that means.

    Well, yeah of course not all do. The article even suggests a correlation between education level and fear of diversity.

    My experience is that race played a big part. The fear or distaste for diversity is evident among most of the Trump voters I know even though none say that is the case. But if you listen to them for any length of time it becomes apparent. The rascism can be obvious like when they talk about immigration and Black Lives Matter and it can be more subtle like when they talk about their aversion to the ‘nanny state’. But either way it’s there on display for anyone to see. They deny it but it’s there.

    #66915
    Avatar photoBilly_T
    Participant

    Trump’s key demo was white males without college degrees. The vast majority of them do not own businesses — which is also the case with the vast majority of Americans, period.

    So it actually doesn’t tell us that much to note that country-club Republicans supported him too, and may not hold such fears. They’re very small in number, even within his base, and a fraction of that number when it comes to the nation (as a percentage) in general.

    Yes, resentment toward blacks, minorities, women and feriners was an essential component — THE essential component — when it comes to his key demo. The research makes this abundantly clear.

    The thing is, what should be done with this knowledge? At the very least, parties that seek to win those votes must start out with this simple rule: Don’t punch down. Don’t trash the voters themselves — which Clinton did with her “basket of deplorables” comment. That was a very stupid, self-inflicted error. Instead, punch up. Go after political parties, corporations, etc. Go after the rich and powerful. Don’t attack the voters themselves who are just as powerless overall as the rest of us. Sanders understands this.

    Next, you actually have to offer stark contrasts to the existing power structures, and be able to explain this with vigor, heart, passion, fire. Clinton couldn’t. At least in public, she has all the charisma of a wet blanket. She may be a completely different person in her private life, but in public, she’s absolutely the worst possible salesperson for any kind of political message.

    That message also needs actual deeds and concrete actions to back it up. If it’s the beginning of a new party or movement, that’s going to be an obstacle to overcome, but it can be done. But, if a political party has a strong history of actually doing great things for those voters, and they can sell it, they win. The Dems haven’t had a great history since the 1960s, so it’s difficult for them. But they do have the New Deal legacy. They’re going to have to return to their heyday and go left from there, and they have to stop running from it. They have to break free of the right’s four-decade hold on them. They have to absolutely reject the conservative vision they’ve embraced, whether or not they even realize they’ve done this.

    #66920
    Avatar photonittany ram
    Moderator
    #66952
    Avatar photojoemad
    Participant

    Trump voters fear diversity? Well-not all do. At least not in my neck of the woods. Most people I know who own their own business voted for the guy for one simple reason: they think he will lower their corporate tax rate and allow them to either buy more toys or expand their business. None of them appear to have any negative attitudes toward other ethnic groups. Their votes were simply -in their mind-a matter of economics. If they could use a diverse population in their own businesses they would-and from what I see-they have. But then again they are fairly well educated and would be considered “upper class”-whatever that means.

    it depends what type of companies these voters work for or run……

    multinational companies, even those that are headquartered in the US will be subject to his policies, even with the corporate tax breaks. The trade agreements that he wants to extinguish will impact these companies big time, in both price and the speed to do business outside the US…..

    Folks tend to forget that Most US multinational companies have a majority of their corporate revenue outside the US.

    Most of the folks that I know in the very diverse SF Bay Area who actually voted for Trump want the return of vanilla ice cream.

    #66963
    Avatar photoZooey
    Moderator

    Diversity means different things.

    I think a lot of people are just fine with racial and sexual diversity…as long as those people integrate.

    They don’t really like cultural diversity. They don’t want their White “way of life” to be altered. So they’re all good with having diversity in the workplace, and in their advertisements, and the rest of it, but as soon as those people start choosing the music, and the menu, and the interior decorations….

    #66965
    waterfield
    Participant

    Believe me the people I referred to are not “country club types” Billy. For the most part they own family run shops. My point is their main reason for supporting -or should I say voting-for Trump was a “whats in it for me” attitude. To them that trumps the environment, healthcare, and most all the issues I try and champion. They can agree with you during a discussion but when it comes down to it their own self interest is what counts. Diversity never enters the picture. But again these are not what you might consider uneducated white trash males. To them I suspect that the changing face of America (i.e.darker and darker) is a real problem. Also older white uneducated males are digging their feet into the ground on diversity as well. I’m not sure what “real research” is but from what i’ve studied I’m not convinced at all that the reason behind the majority of Trump voters was a fear of diversity. I also believe that a hatred of Hillary and the Clintons in general forced many into voting for Trump when an alternative nominee would have captured those same votes. I also think that the diversity narrative fits well with the belief system of a certain group of people. Truth be told there really isn’t a fool proof way of determining what the main reason was for those who voted for this guy let alone the predominant one.

    #66998
    Avatar photozn
    Moderator

    Just another bit in an ongoing, complicated discussion.

    Bernie is wrong and Malcolm was right: What white liberals so often get wrong about racism and Donald Trump

    CHAUNCEY DEVEGA

    http://www.salon.com/2017/04/03/bernie-is-wrong-and-malcolm-was-right-what-white-liberals-so-often-get-wrong-about-racism-and-donald-trump/

    In the United States, white liberals and progressives have historically shown a serious inability to grapple with the realities of the color line and the enduring power of white supremacy. Many of them are either unable or unwilling to understand that fighting against class inequality does not necessarily remedy the specific harms done to African-Americans and other people of color by white racism.

    For example, last Friday Sen. Bernie Sanders spoke in Boston at the Our Revolution Rally, where he said this:

    Some people think that the people who voted for Trump are racists and sexists and homophobes and deplorable folks. I don’t agree, because I’ve been there.

    Given Sanders’ long history of fighting for human rights, his comments are profoundly disappointing. They also demonstrate the blind spot and willful myopia that too many white liberals and progressives have toward white racism in America.

    Sanders’ defense of Donald Trump’s “white working class” voters can be evaluated on empirical grounds. This is not a case of “unknown unknowns.” What do public opinion and other data actually tell us about the 2016 presidential election?

    Donald Trump’s voters — like Republicans and conservatives on average — are much more likely to hold negative attitudes toward African-Americans and other people of color. Social scientists have consistently demonstrated that a mix of “old-fashioned” white racism, white racial resentment (what is known as “modern racism”), xenophobia, ethnocentrism, sexism and nativism heavily influenced white conservatives and right-leaning independents to vote for Donald Trump.

    Trump voters are also more authoritarian than Republicans as a whole. Trump voters possess a fantastical belief that white Americans are “oppressed” and thus somehow victims of racism.

    Polling experts such as Cornell Belcher have placed Donald Trump’s victory over Hillary Clinton within the broader context of a racist backlash against Barack Obama’s presidency among white voters.

    And one must also not overlook how Donald Trump’s presidential campaign and victory inspired a wave of hate crimes across the United States against Muslims, Latinos, African-Americans, First Nations people, gays and lesbians and those of other marginalized communities. Donald Trump used a megaphone of racism and bigotry to win the 2016 presidential election. His supporters heard those signals loud and clear.

    Sanders is also committing another error in reasoning and inference, one that is common among white Americans in the post-civil rights era. Racism and white supremacy are not a function of what is in peoples’ hearts, what they tell you about their beliefs or the intentions behind their words or deeds. In reality, racism and white supremacy are a function of outcomes and structures. Moreover, the “nice people” that Sanders is talking about benefit from white privilege and the other unearned advantages that come from being white in America.

    Sanders’ statement is also a reminder of the incorrect lessons that the Democratic Party is in danger of learning from its 2016 defeat.

    Chasing the largely mythical “white working-class voters whose loyalties went from “Obama to Trump” will not win future elections. The white working-class voters they covet are solidly Republican.

    Alienating people of color and women by embracing Trump’s base of human deplorables will not strengthen the Democratic Party. It will only drive away those voters who are the Democratic Party’s most reliable supporters.

    Sanders has unintentionally exemplified the way that both white liberals and white conservatives are heavily influenced by the white racial frame. As such, both sides of the ideological divide are desperate to see the best in their fellow white Americans, despite the latter’s racist behavior.

    This is why “white allies” are often viewed with great suspicion by people of color. Malcolm X discussed this point in 1963:

    In this deceitful American game of power politics, the Negroes (i.e., the race problem, the integration and civil rights issues) are nothing but tools, used by one group of whites called Liberals against another group of whites called Conservatives, either to get into power or to remain in power. Among whites here in America, the political teams are no longer divided into Democrats and Republicans. The whites who are now struggling for control of the American political throne are divided into “liberal” and “conservative” camps. The white liberals from both parties cross party lines to work together toward the same goal, and white conservatives from both parties do likewise.

    The white liberal differs from the white conservative only in one way: the liberal is more deceitful than the conservative. The liberal is more hypocritical than the conservative. Both want power, but the white liberal is the one who has perfected the art of posing as the Negro’s friend and benefactor; and by winning the friendship, allegiance, and support of the Negro, the white liberal is able to use the Negro as a pawn or tool in this political “football game” that is constantly raging between the white liberals and white conservatives.

    Bernie Sanders’ comments on Friday serve as an unintentional reminder of Malcolm X’s wisdom.

    ===
    ===

    Trump’s supporters believe a false narrative of white victimhood — and the data proves it

    SEAN MCELWEE

    http://www.salon.com/2017/02/12/trumps-supporters-believe-a-false-narrative-of-white-victimhood-and-the-data-proves-it/

    The right sees its political opposition as #triggered snowflakes who need a “safe space.” In the words of Trump’s chief strategist Stephen Bannon, “They’re either a victim of race. They’re victim of their sexual preference. They’re a victim of gender. All about victimhood and the United States is the great oppressor, not the great liberator.”

    While Donald Trump and his ilk claim that victimhood is exclusive to the coastal, “politically correct” elite, I find that feelings of victimhood are central to Trump’s appeal. Trump supporters believe that whites and Christians face discrimination while people of color reap the benefits of government largess. Far from being concerned about “facts, not feelings,” Trump supporters and the conservative movement have created a false narrative of victimhood that motivates their supporters.

    I examined “feeling thermometer” scores in the 2016 American National Election Studies (ANES) pilot survey (which asks respondents to rank politicians and groups from 0, meaning coldest feelings, to 100, meaning warmest feelings) to explore how they measured feelings for Trump among white respondents, based on their views of discrimination against whites and Christians.

    Among whites who believe that white people face no discrimination, the mean feeling thermometer score for Trump was 25 (cold), compared to 64 (warm) among those who believe whites face a “great deal” of discrimination. Among whites who believe Christians face no discrimination, the average feeling thermometer score for Trump was 24, compared with 67 among those who believe Christians face “a great deal” of discrimination (see chart).

    Another question asked respondents whether the federal government treats white people or black people better. Among whites who believe the federal government treats whites “much better,” the mean feeling thermometer score for Trump was 19, compared to a mean score of 65 for those who believe the federal government treats black people “much better.”

    Among independents and Republicans, those with strong feelings that whites and Christians faced discrimination were more supportive of Trump in the Republican primaries (the ANES survey was completed in January). Among white Republicans and independents who believe whites face no discrimination, 69 percent supported a Republican candidate other than Trump. Among those who believe whites face a “great deal” of discrimination, only 34 percent did. Among those who believe the government treats whites much better, 72 percent chose a candidate other than Trump, whereas among those who feel the government treats black people much better, 49 percent did.

    Among Republicans, but particularly among Trump supporters, feelings of white discrimination and loss were profound. Among white Democrats, 74 percent said whites face “little or no” discrimination, compared to 51 percent of white Republicans. While 75 percent of white Democrats said Christians face “little or no” discrimination, only 30 percent of white Republicans did. As the chart below shows, there are deep partisan divides in perceptions on whether the federal government favors white people or black people (or treats both equally).

    To paraphrase a popular idiom, when you’re accustomed to privilege, equality feels like discrimination. These data suggest that this feeling of loss and victimization, and the need for racial solidarity to protect what remains, is core to understanding Trump’s appeal. As I’ve noted before, beliefs in the importance of white racial solidarity are powerful predictors of Trump support. Whites who believe their race is “very important” to their identity had warmer feelings toward Trump. Trump’s rhetoric reflects this reality: He has described a world in which his white supporters are the victims of bad trade deals, elites and rampant crime. They feel they are living through rapid demographic change that will leave them as a minority of the population — and they know how minorities have been treated for so long in American populations.

    As John Paul Brammer notes, Trump’s slogan, “‘Make America Great Again,’ speaks to that victimhood. We were great once. We aren’t anymore, because of those people.” In his book “The Reactionary Mind,” political theorist Corey Robin writes,

    Far from being an invention of the politically correct, victimhood has been a talking point of the right ever since Burke decried the mob’s treatment of Marie Antoinette. The conservative, to be sure, speaks for a special type of victim: one who has lost something of value, as opposed to the wretched of the earth, whose chief complaint is that they never had anything to lose.

    Trumpism is a movement built around the loss of privilege and perceived social status and a desire to re-create social hierarchy. It is one that requires its adherents to live in a state of constant fear and victimization. This mythology requires extensive ideological work and media filtering to remain true. Conservatives must create an ideological bubble in which crime is out of control (instead of hovering near historic lows), the rate of abortion is rising (instead of falling), refugees are committing terrorist attacks en masse (they aren’t at all) and immigrants are taking jobs (it’s the capitalists), all while the government is funneling money to undeserving black people (black people receive government support in accordance with their share of the population, despite making up a disproportionately large share of the poor). Conservatives, and many in the general public, believe that Muslims and immigrants (both legal and unauthorized) make up a dramatically larger share of the population than they actually do.

    At the same time, the right has created a caricature of their opponents on the left. In this imagined caricature, the left is sensitive to being “triggered” at every corner, but also capable of unspeakable political violence. The activist left are “snowflakes” on one hand, and brutal killers on the other. In reality, political violence has long been a tactic of the right, from the labor violence that left thousands of workers dead to lynchings to brutality against peaceful protesters inflicted by corporate security and police to the harassment of women seeking abortion, the destruction of abortion clinics and the assassination of doctors who provide abortions. The rhetoric of victimization has costs — white supremacists are committing unspeakable violence to combat the perceived threat of immigrants, Muslims and people of color. For the next four years, we are likely to have a government driven by perceptions of white Christian victimhood.

    #67039
    Avatar photozn
    Moderator

    DEMOCRATS ARE WRONG: TRUMP SUPPORTERS WERE MORE MOTIVATED BY RACISM THAN ECONOMIC ISSUES

    https://theintercept.com/2017/04/06/top-democrats-are-wrong-trump-supporters-were-more-motivated-by-racism-than-economic-issues/

    IT ISN’T ONLY Republicans, it seems, who traffic in alternative facts. Since Donald Trump’s shock election victory, leading Democrats have worked hard to convince themselves, and the rest of us, that his triumph had less to do with racism and much more to do with economic anxiety — despite almost all of the available evidence suggesting otherwise.

    Consider Bernie Sanders, de facto leader of the #Resistance. “Some people think that the people who voted for Trump are racists and sexists and homophobes and deplorable folks,” he said at a rally in Boston on Friday, alongside fellow progressive senator Elizabeth Warren. “I don’t agree.” Writing in the New York Times three days after the election last November, the senator from Vermont claimed Trump voters were “expressing their fierce opposition to an economic and political system that puts wealthy and corporate interests over their own”.

    Warren agrees with him. “There were millions of people across this country who voted for [Trump] not because of his bigotry, but in spite of that bigotry” because the system is “not working for them economically,” the Massachusetts senator told MSNBC last year.

    Both Sanders and Warren seem much keener to lay the blame at the door of the dysfunctional Democratic Party and an ailing economy than at the feet of racist Republican voters. Their deflection isn’t surprising. Nor is their coddling of those who happily embraced an openly xenophobic candidate. Look, I get it. It’s difficult to accept that millions of your fellow citizens harbor what political scientists have identified as “racial resentment.” The reluctance to acknowledge that bigotry, and tolerance of bigotry, is still so widespread in society is understandable. From an electoral perspective too, why would senior members of the Democratic leadership want to alienate millions of voters by dismissing them as racist bigots?

    Facts, however, as a rather more illustrious predecessor of President Trump once remarked, “are stubborn things.” Interestingly, on the very same day that Sanders offered his evidence-free defense of Trump voters in Boston, the latest data from the American National Election Studies (ANES) was released.

    Philip Klinkner, a political scientist at Hamilton College and an expert on race relations, has pored over this ANES data and tells me that “whether it’s good politics to say so or not, the evidence from the 2016 election is very clear that attitudes about blacks, immigrants, and Muslims were a key component of Trump’s appeal.” For example, he says, “in 2016 Trump did worse than Mitt Romney among voters with low and moderate levels of racial resentment, but much better among those with high levels of resentment.”

    The new ANES data only confirms what a plethora of studies have told us since the start of the presidential campaign: the race was about race. Klinkner himself grabbed headlines last summer when he revealed that the best way to identify a Trump supporter in the U.S. was to ask “just one simple question: is Barack Obama a Muslim?” Because, he said, “if they are white and the answer is yes, 89 percent of the time that person will have a higher opinion of Trump than Clinton.” This is economic anxiety? Really?

    Other surveys and polls of Trump voters found “a strong relationship between anti-black attitudes and support for Trump”; Trump supporters being “more likely to describe African Americans as ‘criminal,’ ‘unintelligent,’ ‘lazy’ and ‘violent’”; more likely to believe “people of color are taking white jobs”; and a “majority” of them rating blacks “as less evolved than whites.” Sorry, but how can any of these prejudices be blamed on free trade or low wages?

    For Sanders, Warren and others on the left, the economy is what matters most and class is everything. Yet the empirical evidence just isn’t there to support them. Yes Trump won a (big) majority of non-college-educated whites, but he also won a majority of college-educated whites, too. He won more young white voters than Clinton did and also a majority of white women; he managed to win white votes regardless of age, gender, income or education. Class wasn’t everything in 2016. In a recent essay in The Nation, analysts Sean McElwee and Jason McDaniel point out that “income predicted support for McCain and Romney, but not Trump.” Their conclusion? “Racial identity and attitudes have further displaced class as the central battleground of American politics.”

    Their view is backed by a detailed Gallup analysis of interviews with a whopping 125,000 Americans, which found that Trump supporters, far from being the “left behind” or the losers of globalization, “earn relatively high household incomes and are no less likely to be unemployed or exposed to competition through trade or immigration.” The “bottom line” for Gallup’s senior economist Jonathan Rothwell? “Trump’s popularity cannot be neatly linked to economic hardship.”

    Look, if you still believe that Trump’s appeal was rooted in economic, and not racial, anxiety, ask yourself the following questions: Why did a majority of Americans earning less than $50,000 a year vote for Clinton, not Trump, according to the exit polls? Why, in the key Rust Belt swing states of Michigan, Wisconsin and Pennsylvania, did most voters who cited the economy as “the most important issue facing the country” opt for Hillary over the Donald? And why didn’t black or Latino working class voters flock to Trump with the same fervor as white working class voters? Or does their economic insecurity not count?

    To be clear, no one is saying there weren’t any legitimate economic grievances in Trumpland, nor is anyone claiming that the economy played no role whatsoever. The point, however, is that it wasn’t the major motivating factor for most Trump voters — or, at least, that’s what we learn when we bother to study those voters. Race trumped economics.

    Defenders of the economy narrative have a “gotcha” question of their own: how can racial resentment have motivated Trump supporters when so many of them voted for Barack Obama, across the Rust Belt, in 2008 and 2012? “They’re not racists,” filmmaker Michael Moore passionately argued last November. “They twice voted for a man whose middle name is Hussein.”

    Klinkner, though, gives short shrift to this argument. First, he tells me, “most of them didn’t vote for Obama. There weren’t many vote switchers between 2012 and 2016.” Second, “working class whites shifted to Trump less because they were working class than because they were white.” Klinkner points out that in 2016, Clinton, unlike Obama, faced a Republican candidate who “pushed the buttons of race and nativism in open and explicit ways that John McCain and Mitt Romney were unwilling or unable to do.”

    If Democrats are going to have any chance of winning back the White House in 2020, they have to understand why they lost in 2016, and that understanding has to be based on facts and figures, however inconvenient or awkward. The Sanders/Warren/Moore wing of the party is right to focus on fair trade and income equality; the calls for higher wages and better regulation are morally and economically correct. What they are not, however, is some sort of silver bullet to solve the issue of racism. As the University of California’s Michael Tesler, author of “Post-Racial or Most-Racial? Race and Politics in the Obama Era,” has pointed out, the “evidence suggests that racial resentment is driving economic anxiety, not the other way around.”

    Always remember: You have to identify the disease before you can begin work on a cure. In the case of support for Donald Trump, the results are in: It isn’t the economy. It’s the racism, stupid.

    #67045
    Avatar photoZooey
    Moderator

    I think DeVega is right about what white liberals get wrong about racism to a fair degree.

    But I think Bernie knows that even while he downplays it. Bernie is clearly committed to avoiding name-calling, and “gutter” politics, or the appearance of it. He relentlessly looks to forge alliances, and that’s to his credit, I think. So he knows full well a lot of Trump’s appeal is to racists, but he knows nothing is gained by saying so. That’s my opinion.

    #67046
    waterfield
    Participant

    I have to admit I remain skeptical of “studies” and “analysis” unless I’ve researched the norms used in such a studies. Even so I know thee are many many different opinions along with “studies” on the engines that drive a Trump supporter. So I tend to look at what’s in front of me-meaning I form opinions normally based on what I see. Do I read studies-of course I do-part of that has been my profession-but I know for every study on a subject there is an equally valid one out there. Its like competing expert witnesses in a trial. For the most part they all sound credible-unless of course you are an expert in that field yourself.

    So in my little world-most of my friends are what one would call “business people”. They are not necessarily wealthy country club people although some are. But they have been friends of mine since middle school and a few even earlier. When we gather the talk is about business and sports. Their political vent is normally about how they can benefit from any Republican including Trump more so than any democrat. For the length of time I’ve known them I cannot recall ever witnessing anything that would even be suspect of racism. At parties they talk of taxes, fair trade issue, the costs to them of healthcare, and of course sports. Now I have a neighbor who I’ve heard him use the N work more than once. I don’t need to know anything more. I consider him a racist and I do not see him as a “friend”. Just a neighbor. OTOH I know-because he has shown me-that he would do everything and anything to help you if you had a problem. But maybe not if I was black. Who knows.

    We also live in a very eclectic area that has an enormous population of people from Mexico, including my neighbor across the street. We are close because we share a love for the Dodgers and have been to his home several times for various celebrations. What’s interesting is that at least half of his relatives-not including him-were Trump supporters-simply because he “talked tough”. These were Mexicans who obviously did not vote because of a fear of diversity. I don’t know -maybe the macho culture of Mexico and Latin American has something to do with that because to a person they respected Trump’s “machismo”.

    I respect both Sanders (didn’t vote for him) and Warren( I would have voted for her) and I agree with their take on this. I also don’t think either one of them holds anything back as Zooey suggests.

    In my opinion there is a multitude of reasons why people voted for the guy. Of course there were people who decided enough is enough when it comes to the darkening of the American face (i.e. a fear of diversity). But again I suspect there were as many who thought their own personal financial security would be better served with Trump. Then there were those who simply wanted someone more “tough” to lead the country. Then there were those who simply wanted anyone but Hillary.

    I know there are those who so detest this guy-and I’m one of them-that they will attribute to his supporters the most evil characteristic they can-and that happens to be racism ! And if one group has an agenda they can do a study and come to a conclusion that supports their belief system. Which is why I tend to formulate my opinions on what I experience. Yes-I read studies and carefully look to see if they are truly evidence based but at bottom I go back to what my experience tells me. Sometimes studies support what I see and sometimes they don’t. I will always trust what I see because if I see a “study” that says I’m wrong or right I know right around the corner is another study.

    I also recognize that I may very well be wrong on this particular issue and Trump supporters may well have supported him because of racism and diversity. That’s just not been I have experienced. Others have a different experience and even take-and that’s fine with me.

    #67047
    Avatar photozn
    Moderator

    I read studies-of course I do-part of that has been my profession-but I know for every study on a subject there is an equally valid one out there. Its like competing expert witnesses in a trial.

    I have to say, W, that to me that’s a generalization, and, an empty one. It is simply not true that for “every” legitmate study out there there’s an opposite one. Want an example? Show me studies that claim the opposite of the several ones posted here.

    That’s the entire problem with the “I rely on what I see” approach. That’s just setting yourself up to not change your mind or not see certain facts. It also means ignoring what OTHERS see. Like people in this thread, ie, some people you know, who have directly seen what you say you haven’t. Do you listen to that with equal energy you expect us to use listening to you?

    Always, to me, the REAL discussion means sorting though all kinds of evidence to see what holds up.

    And the law is no guide here. You say it yourself, over and over. Law is not like science, or social analysis. In the law one finds out how to persuade people to accept a point of view. It depends not on truth but on the persuasive skill of an advocate, who yes has to sound at least plausible but also knows how to get people to buy in. It’s like sales, advertizing, and in a lot of cases, like religion too. But when I look around at the wide array of things I also see that there are ways of looking at things where the so-called persuasive skill of an advocate can be exploded as bs if what is being said does not stand up to real scrutiny. Scrutiny that depends on, and values, evidence and reason, not on the persuasive ability to get people to buy in. So what I refer to has nothing to do with what people want to hear, or how they feel…it holds up or it doesn’t.

    Show me direct evidence that there are valid studies rejecting what is being said here, and you know what? We actually can sort through it all and find the ones that have the better arguments. You can do that on many issues, including this one.

    So for example it is easy these days to get some people to buy into “islam is violent as a religion and so it itself is the problem, that’s what we are at war with, a religion.” Yet if you look around and actually examine the diversity of islam and the different situations it exists in, you find that that generalization is not true. The studies that purport to show the generalization is true do not stand up to actual, real scrutiny. So it doesn’t matter if someone can persuade someone to believe it, or if someone says, based on what they personally think is true based on their own experience. They’re still wrong. It can be shown that they are wrong.

    #67048
    Avatar photoBilly_T
    Participant

    I think DeVega is right about what white liberals get wrong about racism to a fair degree.

    But I think Bernie knows that even while he downplays it. Bernie is clearly committed to avoiding name-calling, and “gutter” politics, or the appearance of it. He relentlessly looks to forge alliances, and that’s to his credit, I think. So he knows full well a lot of Trump’s appeal is to racists, but he knows nothing is gained by saying so. That’s my opinion.

    I thought the same thing upon reading his article. He’s usually quite good. But I think he misses the point that a politician, if he or she actually wants to win, should never punch down. There is no point in going after voters. Go after the powerful instead. Clinton, IMO, made a huge and costly mistake when she talked about half of Trump voters being in that “basket of deplorables.” True or not, she shouldn’t have said it. All it does it make it far more likely their passion for Trump burns even brighter, etc.

    Solves nothing.

    Gramsci once talked about the need for leftists to publicly support certain forms of “nationalism” and talking up the “homeland,” even though, philosophically, our focus is international and “cosmopolitan.” If we actually want to win elections, that is. It’s the same thing here.

    Don’t punch down. Punch up. And find ways to connect with people on a gut level. Sanders appears to understand this.

    #67049
    Avatar photoBilly_T
    Participant

    I have to admit I remain skeptical of “studies” and “analysis” unless I’ve researched the norms used in such a studies. Even so I know thee are many many different opinions along with “studies” on the engines that drive a Trump supporter. So I tend to look at what’s in front of me-meaning I form opinions normally based on what I see. Do I read studies-of course I do-part of that has been my profession-but I know for every study on a subject there is an equally valid one out there. Its like competing expert witnesses in a trial. For the most part they all sound credible-unless of course you are an expert in that field yourself.

    So in my little world-most of my friends are what one would call “business people”. They are not necessarily wealthy country club people although some are. But they have been friends of mine since middle school and a few even earlier. When we gather the talk is about business and sports. Their political vent is normally about how they can benefit from any Republican including Trump more so than any democrat. For the length of time I’ve known them I cannot recall ever witnessing anything that would even be suspect of racism. At parties they talk of taxes, fair trade issue, the costs to them of healthcare, and of course sports. Now I have a neighbor who I’ve heard him use the N work more than once. I don’t need to know anything more. I consider him a racist and I do not see him as a “friend”. Just a neighbor. OTOH I know-because he has shown me-that he would do everything and anything to help you if you had a problem. But maybe not if I was black. Who knows.

    We also live in a very eclectic area that has an enormous population of people from Mexico, including my neighbor across the street. We are close because we share a love for the Dodgers and have been to his home several times for various celebrations. What’s interesting is that at least half of his relatives-not including him-were Trump supporters-simply because he “talked tough”. These were Mexicans who obviously did not vote because of a fear of diversity. I don’t know -maybe the macho culture of Mexico and Latin American has something to do with that because to a person they respected Trump’s “machismo”.

    I respect both Sanders (didn’t vote for him) and Warren( I would have voted for her) and I agree with their take on this. I also don’t think either one of them holds anything back as Zooey suggests.

    In my opinion there is a multitude of reasons why people voted for the guy. Of course there were people who decided enough is enough when it comes to the darkening of the American face (i.e. a fear of diversity). But again I suspect there were as many who thought their own personal financial security would be better served with Trump. Then there were those who simply wanted someone more “tough” to lead the country. Then there were those who simply wanted anyone but Hillary.

    I know there are those who so detest this guy-and I’m one of them-that they will attribute to his supporters the most evil characteristic they can-and that happens to be racism ! And if one group has an agenda they can do a study and come to a conclusion that supports their belief system. Which is why I tend to formulate my opinions on what I experience. Yes-I read studies and carefully look to see if they are truly evidence based but at bottom I go back to what my experience tells me. Sometimes studies support what I see and sometimes they don’t. I will always trust what I see because if I see a “study” that says I’m wrong or right I know right around the corner is another study.

    I also recognize that I may very well be wrong on this particular issue and Trump supporters may well have supported him because of racism and diversity. That’s just not been I have experienced. Others have a different experience and even take-and that’s fine with me.

    Something to keep in mind here, W. On a subject such as racial attitudes, if anything, people tend to understate their views. So all of those surveys of Trump voters are quite likely understating bigotry, racism, prejudice, etc. etc. It’s not like a study asking if you love puppies and rainbows. Who isn’t going to say yes? But questions regarding a person’s take on race? I find it hard to believe you’re going to get everyone being perfectly honest about that. So the fact that an overwhelming number of Trump supporters admit to attitudes about blacks, other minorities and women in the way they do . . . that they vocalize the (crazed) belief that white people are more mistreated than blacks and other minorities . . . . Um, well, we should take them at their word and then add a few percentage points.

    But, as I mention above, it’s a terrible idea to suggest politicians should focus on this. It’s okay for laymen to. It’s okay for amateur observers like us to note these things. But if left of center parties/politicians actually want to win, or at least expand their reach, they really shouldn’t. They should focus instead on the conditions that led/lead to these pathologies, and those in power who create, enable, defend and expand them, etc.

    #67061
    waterfield
    Participant

    https://fivethirtyeight.com/features/how-unconscious-sexism-could-help-explain-trumps-win/

    More “studies”.

    • This reply was modified 7 years, 7 months ago by waterfield.
    #67065
    Avatar photowv
    Participant

    I think DeVega is right about what white liberals get wrong about racism to a fair degree.

    But I think Bernie knows that even while he downplays it. Bernie is clearly committed to avoiding name-calling, and “gutter” politics, or the appearance of it. He relentlessly looks to forge alliances, and that’s to his credit, I think. So he knows full well a lot of Trump’s appeal is to racists, but he knows nothing is gained by saying so. That’s my opinion.

    ————
    ditto

    w
    v

    #67066
    Avatar photozn
    Moderator

    More “studies”.

    “More shallow dismissive quotation marks in lieu of an actual argument.”

    Don’t mind me. Just bein a rat.

    But you DON’T have an argument. Just some overgeneralized shallow dismissal of studies you don’t like (and so don’t read) because they counter your assumptions, a handful of conversations, and then this blissfully sheltered conviction that what YOU see is more than just what YOU see.

    #67105
    waterfield
    Participant

    More “studies”.

    “More shallow dismissive quotation marks in lieu of an actual argument.”

    Don’t mind me. Just bein a rat.

    But you DON’T have an argument. Just some overgeneralized shallow dismissal of studies you don’t like (and so don’t read) because they counter your assumptions, a handful of conversations, and then this blissfully sheltered conviction that what YOU see is more than just what YOU see.

    Well-thank you for that.

    I’m not “arguing” anything. Just stating my belief that there are many different reasons people voted for Trump besides “racism” or a fear of “diversity” which is all part of the equation. If I wanted to win an argument I would go and get a bunch of “studies” that supported my “argument”.

    But thanks for the personal attack even if you don’t recognize it as such-which says a lot/

    • This reply was modified 7 years, 7 months ago by waterfield.
    #67108
    Avatar photozn
    Moderator

    Just stating my belief that there are many different reasons people voted for Trump besides “racism” or a fear of “diversity” which is all part of the equation.

    No one said there weren’t other reasons.

    The evidence, though, shows that in fact one version or another of racism was a significant and probably decisive part of it.

Viewing 22 posts - 1 through 22 (of 22 total)
  • You must be logged in to reply to this topic.

Comments are closed.