Instead of building a wall to protect us from Mexico, we could build walls around the top 10 economic metro areas across the nation and let the republicans outside the walls figure it out themselves - a la Lord of the Flies. They could debate white 'victimhood' between watching reruns of Duck Dynasty.
51
The average income of Trump voters is $71,000!
This populism is not led by the working poor but by the middle class whites who want :
More white's Less Browns - More natives Less immigrants More Bible -Less science and reason More freedom Less progress AND most of all comfortable emotional alignment with a boob in charge kinda like THEM!
This populism is not led by the working poor but by the middle class whites who want :
More white's Less Browns - More natives Less immigrants More Bible -Less science and reason More freedom Less progress AND most of all comfortable emotional alignment with a boob in charge kinda like THEM!
37
"In support of this argument, the authors point to 2016 exit poll data showing that Hillary Clinton won voters who said the economy was the most important issue by 11 points, 52-41, while Trump carried those who said immigration was the most important issue facing the country by nearly two to one, 64-33."
Why? Because lazy scapegoating and fervid resentment born from an unearned sense of entitlement that is foremost race based are much easier reactions to changes in circumstances than seeking to contribute to actual solutions. And we're supposed to have sympathy for these folks? Seriously? And somehow the blame for this surrender of thought must be laid at the feet of so-called "postmaterialist values" rather than the decimation of unions, the greed of companies taking full advantage of a new global environment, not to forget the wholesale ingestion of trickle down voodoo economics by the majority of these said people. Please.
Why? Because lazy scapegoating and fervid resentment born from an unearned sense of entitlement that is foremost race based are much easier reactions to changes in circumstances than seeking to contribute to actual solutions. And we're supposed to have sympathy for these folks? Seriously? And somehow the blame for this surrender of thought must be laid at the feet of so-called "postmaterialist values" rather than the decimation of unions, the greed of companies taking full advantage of a new global environment, not to forget the wholesale ingestion of trickle down voodoo economics by the majority of these said people. Please.
45
Okay, call me a lefty-liberal-elite if you want, but I don't get it. Was it we LLEs who destroyed unions? Funny, I seem to recall some guy named Reagan doing that. Was it we LLEs who reduced taxes in a way that benefited upper income people at many multiples of any benefits going to the lower and middle income groups? How many people remember that it was Reagan who destroyed our progressive tax system. For two or three years during his administration, there were only two income tax brackets, a situation which vastly benefited the rich. Is it the LLEs who keep trying to do away with the estate tax, something that applies to less than one-tenth of one percent of estates--that is, to the estates of the richest of the rich. Is it LLEs who believe that corporations are people, so that their huge amounts of wealth can be used to support political campaigns against the interests of we, the people? Is it LLEs who quickly ended any funding for retraining for displaced workers? Is it LLEs who inserted tax breaks for the wealthy into the stimulus plan rather than money for projects that would have put people back to work? It's true that the Democrats frequently fail to fight sufficiently strongly against the efforts coming from Republicans that hurt we ordinary people, but they are NOT the ones who introduce and support all these policies that hurt 99% of the population.
63
So Trump got elected and the Republicans have control of EVERYthing. (Except the majority of voters, but that's clearly not worth all that much.)
Here's an idea: run against Trump's "peculiar" populism with a platform that is genuinely populist, and unambiguously pro-most of us.
Not pro-job.
Not pro-industry.
Not pro-growth.
Talk about the need to explore 21st century solutions for 21st century problems: Green Energy, Basic Income, Universal Healthcare.
Dispense with the public-private partnerships. Stop shoehorning "market solutions" into everything. Look people in the eye and tell them that "innovative financial tools" is code for "gambling" and admit what we all know: Wall Street bankers are mostly immoral a-holes. Reject the narrative that the way to get people back on their feet is to bribe employers to hire them at starvation wages.
Here's an idea: run against Trump's "peculiar" populism with a platform that is genuinely populist, and unambiguously pro-most of us.
Not pro-job.
Not pro-industry.
Not pro-growth.
Talk about the need to explore 21st century solutions for 21st century problems: Green Energy, Basic Income, Universal Healthcare.
Dispense with the public-private partnerships. Stop shoehorning "market solutions" into everything. Look people in the eye and tell them that "innovative financial tools" is code for "gambling" and admit what we all know: Wall Street bankers are mostly immoral a-holes. Reject the narrative that the way to get people back on their feet is to bribe employers to hire them at starvation wages.
33
Great article. In the election, the Democrats proved Edsall’s thesis by focusing on post materialist issues, while hewing to more conservative fiscal principals to protect their wealth. Hillary Clinton was their shinning avatar. By embracing postmaterialism and turning their back on economic issues they underscored that the party was no longer “of the people,” and more “of themselves.” In the primary the Democratic Party threw Bernie Sanders, a crusader against economic inequality, under the bus. And when the dust settled and Clinton had won, she and the party flushed Bernie’s ideas down the toilet. Then, the party went back to polishing her crown in anticipation of her coronation. Corporations, big banks, and the financial sector have conspired to create vast profits for themselves, and consequently, to drive the country apart economically. Trump and Sanders were the only candidates that indicated any sympathy with that reality and its ramifications for the average person. Sanders was sincere. Trump was a con artist. And the result? Well, as the man said: “There is a sucker born every minute.”
50
I agree completely with Wilkinson that the imposition of Trump's anti-democratic policies on the more liberal populations of U.S. urban centers will do great harm to the nation. It's clear from the left's reaction to the early days of the Trump administration that the people are willing to vigorously oppose governmental action that is contrary to the long established values of the nation. Values that were once held dear in the heartland that now endorses Trump. I wish I could be more optimistic that the feckless Democratic party is up to the challenge of bridging the gap between the urban and rural populations. With the recklessness and willful infliction of chaos by the administration, I fear that unification may occur by default when Trump causes an international crisis that spirals out of control resulting in armed conflict. When the price of supporting Trump comes at the cost of dead and wounded U.S. service personnel, most of whom come from small town America, perhaps then his supporters will reevaluate their position that Trump can do no wrong.
28
Its seems that those who suffered from Obama Derangement Syndrome just traded up to Trump Psychosis. Having a black man in the White House was more than some could handle. It created a great deal of anxiety in their world and untold suspicions of President Obama's motives. The amount of denial it takes to justify Trumps behavior must be incredible.This conflict with reality has to cause some serious delusions when confronted with alternative facts.Even a 3 year Muslim becomes a terrorist in their eyes.
The act by the alt-right to demonize anybody who thinks that putting a reality TV star who has declared bankruptcy 6 times in charge of the country doesn't seem like a good idea.
Linda Selvia
The act by the alt-right to demonize anybody who thinks that putting a reality TV star who has declared bankruptcy 6 times in charge of the country doesn't seem like a good idea.
Linda Selvia
23
So there’s this old joke:
Mommy and daddy are sitting around the dinner table with six-year old Johnny who has never spoken a word in his life.
Johnny suddenly blurts out, “Pass the potatoes.”
Mom and dad are shocked. They say, “ Why have you never-ever said a word before.
Johnny replies, “Up till now everything was O.K.
The American people are currently living with a six-year old psychologically disturbed child named Donald who has just discovered the sound of his own voice; likes what he is hearing; doesn’t like what he’s seeing around him; and is under the impression he is the boss of the world.
Mommy and daddy are sitting around the dinner table with six-year old Johnny who has never spoken a word in his life.
Johnny suddenly blurts out, “Pass the potatoes.”
Mom and dad are shocked. They say, “ Why have you never-ever said a word before.
Johnny replies, “Up till now everything was O.K.
The American people are currently living with a six-year old psychologically disturbed child named Donald who has just discovered the sound of his own voice; likes what he is hearing; doesn’t like what he’s seeing around him; and is under the impression he is the boss of the world.
18
There is nothing peculiar nor new about white ethnic sectarian socioeconomic supremacist political nationalism.
Populism is a euphemism for fascism and bolshevism.
Populism is a euphemism for African enslavement, African Jim Crow, the Confederate States of America, the Ku Klux Klan, White Citizens Council and conservative evangelical Tea Party Republicanism.
Populism is a euphemism for fascism and bolshevism.
Populism is a euphemism for African enslavement, African Jim Crow, the Confederate States of America, the Ku Klux Klan, White Citizens Council and conservative evangelical Tea Party Republicanism.
21
We could have had President Sanders. Just saying. Imagine how wonderful....
23
There's one factor that Edsall ignores. For the entirety of American history, people have lived with far LESS economic security than they have now. Nowadays, no one will die of starvation or of exposure to the elements or even of disease (regardless of what happens to Medicare, Obamacare, etc). Moreover, even the poor consume goodies which in the past would seem positively luxurious (e.g., telephones, tv, the internet not to mention I-phones and Chicken McNuggets)
So why is it that, nowadays, people are so much more fearful?
Well, maybe it's because our expectations (fostered by one of our new luxuries -- i.e., the info(tainment) complex) have positively sky-rocketed. We expect not only to live in mini-McMansions and eat maxi-McNuggets, we expect our diseased, withered old bodies to be tethered to the most expensive test tubes money can buy (NO DEATH PANELS!!).
And who's supposed to supply all this safety, comfort and protection?. Well, notwithstanding the bellowing on the part of so many ... low information voters ... to keep the Government's hand off their Medicare, it is, of course, the Government.
We are an extremely wealthy society but there is not enough wealth even on the part of the mega (and not so mega) rich to tax away to keep everyone safe to the extent we now expect. And given that almost certainly we will not be able to adjust our expectations, good things are not on the horizon.
So why is it that, nowadays, people are so much more fearful?
Well, maybe it's because our expectations (fostered by one of our new luxuries -- i.e., the info(tainment) complex) have positively sky-rocketed. We expect not only to live in mini-McMansions and eat maxi-McNuggets, we expect our diseased, withered old bodies to be tethered to the most expensive test tubes money can buy (NO DEATH PANELS!!).
And who's supposed to supply all this safety, comfort and protection?. Well, notwithstanding the bellowing on the part of so many ... low information voters ... to keep the Government's hand off their Medicare, it is, of course, the Government.
We are an extremely wealthy society but there is not enough wealth even on the part of the mega (and not so mega) rich to tax away to keep everyone safe to the extent we now expect. And given that almost certainly we will not be able to adjust our expectations, good things are not on the horizon.
19
Very interesting article. Read it twice, and distilled down it simply seems to say that xenophobia and nationalism are linked to the less educated and people who are economically less better off. They don't like their situation, and so they just want to punch someone in the face that doesn't look like them. People are nasty when they live in a nasty situation. HOW DO WE FIX THIS? How do we reach a group of people that need to be convinced that the best way to help themselves is not to hurt someone else, but instead, to support actions that would directly impact their own well-being, such as access to healthcare for all, a clean environment, access to education and job training that won't put them or keep them in the poorhouse? How many of us are continually baffled at "conservative" middle class masochism, their willingness to continually shoot themselves in their own foot for the nominal sake of waving the flag and their religion at "strangers" and yet act on no true civic responsibility or virtue in their religion? That is the question!
32
There is nothing novel in Trump's attempts to gain popular support. It has all been tried and done before. He is tapping into the seething racial hatred that has been built up in recent decades by the Republican Party. It reached a pinnacle with the election of President Obama when the GOP pledge was to destroy his presidency and restrict him to a single term. Trump has plugged into this racism and turned it against immigrants of the non-Aryan kind ..why does that sound so familiar? He has reinforced the Big Lie propaganda that the economy is failing because of Obama. He has tapped into the xenophobic rage against Mexicans and Asians that came with the destruction of the middle class by the rich and powerful - his people. He has a loyal crowd that cheers when he mocks the disabled, that is enthralled when he is disgustingly obscene. He may not be a swastika bearing goose-stepper, but he is following a well trodden path paved by other megalomaniacs like Hitler and Mussolini and Joe McCarthy. No, Trump has shown us nothing new, broken no new ground, he has only profited from the fertile swamp of hatred, misogyny and the disinformation fed nonstop to the uneducated, a swamp prepared for him by the Republican Party.
22
I knew it all along: It's the hippies' fault. All that peace and love and rock 'n' roll could not help but foment racial hatred and corporate greed. What were we thinking?
18
Wonder who the WWC will blame this time when the GOP crashes the economy again? The lure of victimhood is strong. Or will they just pretend they never voted for Trump. Funny how those with White Male Privilege denounce 'line cutter' while those of us without it say we finally get our turn at bat. And those who strike out don't like it when others can hit home runs. So they blame the umpire.
17
We need to focus on outcomes. Will the Puppet Trump's economic policies (no stable trade, constant intervention by tweets, slashing Health Care, etc) deliver measurable benefits to the red states or not. Picking fights with friendly and opposing countries may go of the rail quickly. Picking a war with Iran may not have been what his voters wanted.
If the internal and external conflicts escalate and there are no visible benefits to the grassroots in two years I do not see how this administration can sustain itself - butI was wrong before.
If the internal and external conflicts escalate and there are no visible benefits to the grassroots in two years I do not see how this administration can sustain itself - butI was wrong before.
7
Reading this, what stood out to me most was that Trump's voters seem driven by insecurity about the future and their role in it, and yet they handed all of the levers of power to those who would make them more insecure. Manufacturing jobs became good jobs not because they required some kind of particular American intelligence and skill, but because unions fought for every benefit, every wage increase, every safety regulation. We can't have it all: we can't have cheap services and underpay those who perform them. CEOs of nursing homes get wealthy while the people who change the bedpans eke by at wages barely above the minimum (if that) and no benefits. The issue isn't that jobs have left, but that the jobs that remain are not compensated fairly.
The sad thing to me is that I know so many people who saw Bernie Sanders and Trump as the only politicians who were listening to them. But the thing about Sanders: he would not have risen to the presidency by playing on the voters fear and xenophobia. When I ask my non-traditional community college students (many forced into classes for "retraining" for jobs that won't pay much either) what they think about Social Security, most say it doesn't matter: it will be gone when they are old. They are defeated, and Trump is their middle finger raised to those they believe will empty the till and leave them with nothing.
The sad thing to me is that I know so many people who saw Bernie Sanders and Trump as the only politicians who were listening to them. But the thing about Sanders: he would not have risen to the presidency by playing on the voters fear and xenophobia. When I ask my non-traditional community college students (many forced into classes for "retraining" for jobs that won't pay much either) what they think about Social Security, most say it doesn't matter: it will be gone when they are old. They are defeated, and Trump is their middle finger raised to those they believe will empty the till and leave them with nothing.
43
Corporate America took their security and quality of life and gave nothing in return, not even thanks. Just a good luck middle finger to working class people and what was the cover story? It's immigration that's stealing your jobs and the Chinese and Mexicans are taking them to. What hogwash. The leaders in this country are a disgrace. I hope there is a reckoning someday and justice is done.
17
There is an Anarchist movement in America that has been ignored for far too long. It began in the early 90’s and during the Clinton admin one could see it at protests in the fringe and outrageous positions taken by some in banners and statements.
The GOP machine takes advantage of this by using these outliers as exemplars to paint all protesters as being the same by feigning ignorance and an inability to differentiate. This is a passive aggressive attempt to make regulation of protests seem a logical response.
They made a big splash in the 1999 Seattle WTO protests. They were still not reported on as a separate thing from the legit protesters.
This Anarchist movement proved it had legs as it hijacked the Occupy movement and again was ignored or if mentioned it was conflated with the legit Occupy protestors. And again the GOP used pretense of ignorance and that Press conflation to make it seem all protestors were of that same ilk.
This also serves the militant and lazy among the Police who don’t want to have to differentiate good and bad protestors.
This is important and the Press needs to focus on it and make it clear there is a dark group of people abusing our system by coatailing onto legitimate protests not unlike how Gawker was abusing the First Amendment by pretending to be a news organization to get away with abusing people under the patina of “legit” stuff they posted as cover.
Protest organizers should start by banning & removing anyone who hides their face.
The GOP machine takes advantage of this by using these outliers as exemplars to paint all protesters as being the same by feigning ignorance and an inability to differentiate. This is a passive aggressive attempt to make regulation of protests seem a logical response.
They made a big splash in the 1999 Seattle WTO protests. They were still not reported on as a separate thing from the legit protesters.
This Anarchist movement proved it had legs as it hijacked the Occupy movement and again was ignored or if mentioned it was conflated with the legit Occupy protestors. And again the GOP used pretense of ignorance and that Press conflation to make it seem all protestors were of that same ilk.
This also serves the militant and lazy among the Police who don’t want to have to differentiate good and bad protestors.
This is important and the Press needs to focus on it and make it clear there is a dark group of people abusing our system by coatailing onto legitimate protests not unlike how Gawker was abusing the First Amendment by pretending to be a news organization to get away with abusing people under the patina of “legit” stuff they posted as cover.
Protest organizers should start by banning & removing anyone who hides their face.
10
America First takes us back to pre-WWII isolationism, before we learned the harsh lessons of Pearl Harbor and a hot, perilous war. At that time we were vulnerable, lacking military might and alarmed, and when we joined the fighting, a lot of our young men were dying. Under these extreme pressures, all political and ideological differences could be subordinated to helping our Allies, building the arsenal of democaracy, and winning the war. That wasn't easy to sell to the Heartland, and the success of that effort created the great America that Trump wants to return to.
Now our wars are continuous but low pressure, and we are tempted to think ourselves invulnerable inside our fortress, and close the doors. Trump may think that we can afford to disregard and weaken our alliances, but the fortress is much more porous now. Manufacturing is worldwide, wealth more evenly spread among nations, and our economy more disruptable from outside. We have benefitted profoundly from having peaceful and collaborative relationships with other nations, and from offering a beacon, however imperfect, to the unfortunate. Now we may discover what it is to lose that advantage. Our problems in part come from having had it too good for too long. Yes, attention must be paid to the needs of the Heartland, but Trump doesn't know history.
Now our wars are continuous but low pressure, and we are tempted to think ourselves invulnerable inside our fortress, and close the doors. Trump may think that we can afford to disregard and weaken our alliances, but the fortress is much more porous now. Manufacturing is worldwide, wealth more evenly spread among nations, and our economy more disruptable from outside. We have benefitted profoundly from having peaceful and collaborative relationships with other nations, and from offering a beacon, however imperfect, to the unfortunate. Now we may discover what it is to lose that advantage. Our problems in part come from having had it too good for too long. Yes, attention must be paid to the needs of the Heartland, but Trump doesn't know history.
7
There are huge holes in these analyses, and lots of caricatures. I'm sure a more mature understanding will develop over time: what we have now is a lot of simplified, reactive thinking.
The signature legislative achievement of the Obama administration is Obamacare. This is a health issue, and a working-class issue. Republicans fought it tooth and nail; they have no credible replacement on offer. Without Republican obstruction, Obama could have made it better, included a public option, insured more people at less cost to them.
Somehow the white working class, who need healthcare, were led in great numbers by the Republicans to take against it. We're back to a "what's the matter with Kansas?" argument, not a "liberal elite internationalist" argument.
Clinton offered (after prodding by Sanders) to pay for college for all working-class people. Again, a patently class issue, nothing to do with multiculturalism. And yet for a lot of reasons, she was (made) too distasteful for the white working class's support.
And what have Trump and Republicans really offered the working class? Repeal of Obamacare, threats to Medicare and Social Security, a education secretary nominee who hates public schools, and so on.
It feels good when a billionaire tells working-class whites that foreigners and blacks won't be taking away their stuff any more, that their fathers' jobs will reappear in the heartland. But he has not offered the working class any realistic relief from their problems.
The signature legislative achievement of the Obama administration is Obamacare. This is a health issue, and a working-class issue. Republicans fought it tooth and nail; they have no credible replacement on offer. Without Republican obstruction, Obama could have made it better, included a public option, insured more people at less cost to them.
Somehow the white working class, who need healthcare, were led in great numbers by the Republicans to take against it. We're back to a "what's the matter with Kansas?" argument, not a "liberal elite internationalist" argument.
Clinton offered (after prodding by Sanders) to pay for college for all working-class people. Again, a patently class issue, nothing to do with multiculturalism. And yet for a lot of reasons, she was (made) too distasteful for the white working class's support.
And what have Trump and Republicans really offered the working class? Repeal of Obamacare, threats to Medicare and Social Security, a education secretary nominee who hates public schools, and so on.
It feels good when a billionaire tells working-class whites that foreigners and blacks won't be taking away their stuff any more, that their fathers' jobs will reappear in the heartland. But he has not offered the working class any realistic relief from their problems.
32
Thank you so much for this. I feel as though I'm in the lonely middle.
On the one hand, I'm a tenured prof in the social sciences who is inspired by Bernie Sanders as I have never been inspired by any other politician. Especially since I then voted for Hillary, I'm a card carrying member of the left wing elites despised by so many Trump voters.
On the other hand, I'm a white male with working class roots - the first in my family even to attend college, nevermind teach it. From that perspective, the quote from Hochschild about affirmative action and "linecutters, who jump ahead in the queue for the American dream" deeply resonated with me.
I have served on many faculty search committees over the years, and have seen huge differences in objective qualifications routinely ignored in order to bestow tenure-track teaching posts based on gender and race. I have many times seen graduate students with little or no publishing or teaching experience hired over PhD's far more accomplished on both scores (and well within the relevant subfields) with no plausible explanation except discrimination against whites and males. And since this all takes place behind closed doors, nothing can be done.
I despise Trump too, but we left wing elites must start thinking and acting not as narrow minded radicals, but like open minded liberals - welcoming, engaging with the views of those who disagree. As Socrates reminded us in the Apology, the unexamined life is not worth living.
On the one hand, I'm a tenured prof in the social sciences who is inspired by Bernie Sanders as I have never been inspired by any other politician. Especially since I then voted for Hillary, I'm a card carrying member of the left wing elites despised by so many Trump voters.
On the other hand, I'm a white male with working class roots - the first in my family even to attend college, nevermind teach it. From that perspective, the quote from Hochschild about affirmative action and "linecutters, who jump ahead in the queue for the American dream" deeply resonated with me.
I have served on many faculty search committees over the years, and have seen huge differences in objective qualifications routinely ignored in order to bestow tenure-track teaching posts based on gender and race. I have many times seen graduate students with little or no publishing or teaching experience hired over PhD's far more accomplished on both scores (and well within the relevant subfields) with no plausible explanation except discrimination against whites and males. And since this all takes place behind closed doors, nothing can be done.
I despise Trump too, but we left wing elites must start thinking and acting not as narrow minded radicals, but like open minded liberals - welcoming, engaging with the views of those who disagree. As Socrates reminded us in the Apology, the unexamined life is not worth living.
32
Please keep insulting the Trump voter Mr. Edsall, it only perpetuates liberalism's demise. By the way, the median income of a Trump voter is in excess of $70,000 which essentially disproves your entire piece.
You really need to get out into the real world.
You really need to get out into the real world.
11
You are obviously correct that the economic disparities that have developed since 1981 is central to the disaffection with Democrats demonstrated in this election. But it does not explain why the "populists" have decided to turn the government completely over to the architects of their problems. The problems of the declining middle class, and the poor are due to 36 years of the trickle-down, supply side "economics" con. Yes, the Democrats have failed to reverse the steady flow of wealth up to the 0.01%, but it isn't because they didn't try. Obama's attempts to help the middle class were blocked at every turn by Republican obstruction.
The real problem is the extremely successful propaganda war that the right-wing media have waged over the years, with Fox "News", hate radio and fake news tabloids. The mainstream media have responded by moving far to the right, becoming very conservative. Even this response has failed because the radical right has successfully branded the "lamestream" media as being "liberal". In reality, it hasn't been liberal in decades.
As long as 40% of the population truly believes that the mainstream media is liberal, why not own that label? The mainstream media need to start calling out the lies, not only of the trump administration, but of all the right-wing propaganda machine. If it does not, we are doomed.
The real problem is the extremely successful propaganda war that the right-wing media have waged over the years, with Fox "News", hate radio and fake news tabloids. The mainstream media have responded by moving far to the right, becoming very conservative. Even this response has failed because the radical right has successfully branded the "lamestream" media as being "liberal". In reality, it hasn't been liberal in decades.
As long as 40% of the population truly believes that the mainstream media is liberal, why not own that label? The mainstream media need to start calling out the lies, not only of the trump administration, but of all the right-wing propaganda machine. If it does not, we are doomed.
11
Trump's team bullies, baffles, and blusters, when bogged down with basic, but blunt questioning from the press. At the end of the day, the reporters leave the room, fully flabbergasted, flustered and frustrated, all at the same time. The recent travel ban is a travesty of truth. Sean Spicer, with his sourpuss attitude, often caterwauls like his boss. Facts are blocked with their brand of bravado.
Foreign policy is suffering unsavory vagaries of mood swings. Tempers flare. Patience is gone with the wind. Almost the entire Trump team dissemble so daringly. Truth never triumphs in their ''alternate universe'', which is full of fluffs and flakes. Perilous precedences are set.
Rough and tumble prevails. Free-for-all fulminates. A whirlpool of white lies fly around like gnats. Chaos is becoming the order of the day.
Foreign policy is suffering unsavory vagaries of mood swings. Tempers flare. Patience is gone with the wind. Almost the entire Trump team dissemble so daringly. Truth never triumphs in their ''alternate universe'', which is full of fluffs and flakes. Perilous precedences are set.
Rough and tumble prevails. Free-for-all fulminates. A whirlpool of white lies fly around like gnats. Chaos is becoming the order of the day.
2
The problem is capitalism.
America is moving into an era of productivity (artificial intelligence, robotics) induced joblessness. Through universities, DARPA, et al, American taxpayers have paid for the research that has brought electronics, robotics and artificial intelligence to the fore. Capitalism has returned 95% of returns on productivity gains to the richest 1%.
America is moving into an era of productivity (artificial intelligence, robotics) induced joblessness. Through universities, DARPA, et al, American taxpayers have paid for the research that has brought electronics, robotics and artificial intelligence to the fore. Capitalism has returned 95% of returns on productivity gains to the richest 1%.
12
The reason that growing population proportions did "not experience the benefits of prosperity" can be attributed to the unrestrained greed of elites who were not satisfied with merely obscene levels of affluence but, once achieved, insisted on upgrading it to financial pornography. Bernie Sanders understands this. So does Donald Trump. The difference is that, to The Donald, this is just fine, monumental hypocrisy to the contrary.
www.endthemadnessnow.org
www.endthemadnessnow.org
4
This and the innumerably similar studies into "Why Trump" miss a key component in my opinion and that is accounting for the 50% of American voters that did not vote.
This apathy or I would argue false comfort is the most important demographic we should be studying. Many more people in the US "don't care" than support either Trumpian anti-intellectual populism or the enlightened global urban intellectual thinking.
This apathy or I would argue false comfort is the most important demographic we should be studying. Many more people in the US "don't care" than support either Trumpian anti-intellectual populism or the enlightened global urban intellectual thinking.
9
One commenter noted that wars have unpredictable consequences because there are "too many variables to factor effectively."
Consider marriage, traditionally an important bedrock of society. I think marriage is in part an ongoing negotiation between prospective or current spouses. But in large part the parameters of that negotiation are set by society. The wider the parameters, the more variables there are to negotiate. When those parameters are in flux, that in itself is a new variable that greatly increases the odds of misunderstandings. Emotions may run high and hot.
I personally don't see gay marriage as a threat to heterosexuals, but it introduces a new variable. I suppose it increases the competition for some potential mates.
To the extent that monogamy is no longer bedrock and polyamory becomes more acceptable, that's another important variable to be negotiated.
The same point applies to more flexible roles allowed by society regarding breadwinning, householding, and child rearing.
The old roles were established over time based, one supposes, on experience, custom and the thoughts of secular and religious scholars.
I agree changes were necessary but I'm not so confident they've been well-considered. I often joke that the women of my generation changed the world when they were sophomores.
People are having to figure this out for themselves as they try to earn a living and live a life.
Consider marriage, traditionally an important bedrock of society. I think marriage is in part an ongoing negotiation between prospective or current spouses. But in large part the parameters of that negotiation are set by society. The wider the parameters, the more variables there are to negotiate. When those parameters are in flux, that in itself is a new variable that greatly increases the odds of misunderstandings. Emotions may run high and hot.
I personally don't see gay marriage as a threat to heterosexuals, but it introduces a new variable. I suppose it increases the competition for some potential mates.
To the extent that monogamy is no longer bedrock and polyamory becomes more acceptable, that's another important variable to be negotiated.
The same point applies to more flexible roles allowed by society regarding breadwinning, householding, and child rearing.
The old roles were established over time based, one supposes, on experience, custom and the thoughts of secular and religious scholars.
I agree changes were necessary but I'm not so confident they've been well-considered. I often joke that the women of my generation changed the world when they were sophomores.
People are having to figure this out for themselves as they try to earn a living and live a life.
2
Mr. Edsall:
As long as you and the other "smart" people continue to confuse the real causes of what allowed Trump to win, you'll remain in the dark. Forget your intellectualism that trots out reasons like "post-materialism". It's much more simple than that: the majority of Americans (and workers in other countries) finally got fed up with a system that took more and more from them and never delivered on its promise that wealth would "trickle down".
You say that "redistributionist" policies failed. Yes they did, but not how you mean it. Great wealth WAS redistributed...but UPWARD, and as a result, the great engine of commerce - consumers - was robbed of its fuel. And despite your statistics that "prove" that Hillary won the majority of those who said the economy was their chief concern, she didn't make the case that she could address these concerns. Many of these voters had supported Sanders, and voted for her as last resort, not because they believed she could or would help them, but because they knew Trump would not.
And make no mistake, Trump will not reward his followers by helping their economic state. He's a "trickle downer" to his roots.
Finally, stop conflating the xenophobic, low information mobs that have supported Trump and the conservatives with "populism". Just because something is "popular" doesn't make it popuLIST.
As long as you and the other "smart" people continue to confuse the real causes of what allowed Trump to win, you'll remain in the dark. Forget your intellectualism that trots out reasons like "post-materialism". It's much more simple than that: the majority of Americans (and workers in other countries) finally got fed up with a system that took more and more from them and never delivered on its promise that wealth would "trickle down".
You say that "redistributionist" policies failed. Yes they did, but not how you mean it. Great wealth WAS redistributed...but UPWARD, and as a result, the great engine of commerce - consumers - was robbed of its fuel. And despite your statistics that "prove" that Hillary won the majority of those who said the economy was their chief concern, she didn't make the case that she could address these concerns. Many of these voters had supported Sanders, and voted for her as last resort, not because they believed she could or would help them, but because they knew Trump would not.
And make no mistake, Trump will not reward his followers by helping their economic state. He's a "trickle downer" to his roots.
Finally, stop conflating the xenophobic, low information mobs that have supported Trump and the conservatives with "populism". Just because something is "popular" doesn't make it popuLIST.
7
As usual, Edsall writes an interest piece. But I question the premise - "liberal victory in the cultural revolution of the 1960s ... brought declining social class voting, undermining the working-class-oriented Left parties that had implemented redistributive policies for most of the 20th century. " Even a cursory reading of Hillary's policies belie any surrender of redistribution as a key tool of the American left.
In reality, Edsall is speaking to the "upstairs-downstairs" marriage ordained by Obama where liberals are now competitive with the urban affluent who value "freedom of expression, environmental protection, gender equality, and tolerance of gays, handicapped people and foreigners". It is an open question, however, whether these suburban soccer Moms would have supported Hillary after she raised their taxes. (Obama was not blamed for the expiration of the Bush tax cuts.)
Democrats are betting their resurgence on the "alliance between the populist right and the Democratic left" predicted by Inglehart and Norris. But liberals have offered redistribution as the bait for blue collar fealty for a long time with few takers. Instead, the coal miner in WV and the pipe fitter in MI prefer independence and only welcome government benefits when they believe they are "earned" (e.g. SS). In the end, Trump voters are expecting him to "deliver on his promises to millions of culturally beleaguered and economically threatened constituents." So far so good.
In reality, Edsall is speaking to the "upstairs-downstairs" marriage ordained by Obama where liberals are now competitive with the urban affluent who value "freedom of expression, environmental protection, gender equality, and tolerance of gays, handicapped people and foreigners". It is an open question, however, whether these suburban soccer Moms would have supported Hillary after she raised their taxes. (Obama was not blamed for the expiration of the Bush tax cuts.)
Democrats are betting their resurgence on the "alliance between the populist right and the Democratic left" predicted by Inglehart and Norris. But liberals have offered redistribution as the bait for blue collar fealty for a long time with few takers. Instead, the coal miner in WV and the pipe fitter in MI prefer independence and only welcome government benefits when they believe they are "earned" (e.g. SS). In the end, Trump voters are expecting him to "deliver on his promises to millions of culturally beleaguered and economically threatened constituents." So far so good.
1
Well this makes sense, especially since it explains the rise in populism worldwide.
So let's say it's true. What then? Something about these studies makes this all seem inevitable. Where is the article that tells us what we can do to change the direction?
Clearly, if we liberals want our worldview back in order within the next four years, we need to stop playing into the educated elite stereotype. And we need to include poor white folk in our discussions of equity. And let's stop calling them "trash" while we're at it.
Any other ideas?
So let's say it's true. What then? Something about these studies makes this all seem inevitable. Where is the article that tells us what we can do to change the direction?
Clearly, if we liberals want our worldview back in order within the next four years, we need to stop playing into the educated elite stereotype. And we need to include poor white folk in our discussions of equity. And let's stop calling them "trash" while we're at it.
Any other ideas?
4
FDR stated the case well in 1938:
"Democracy has disappeared in several other great nations-not because the people of those nations disliked democracy, but because they had grown tired of unemployment and insecurity, of seeing their children hungry while they sat helpless in the face of government confusion and government weakness through lack of leadership in government. Finally, in desperation, they chose to sacrifice liberty in the hope of getting something to eat. We in America know that our own democratic institutions can be preserved and made to work. But in order to preserve them we need to act together, to meet the problems of the Nation boldly, and to prove that the practical operation of democratic government is equal to the task of protecting the security of the people."
"Democracy has disappeared in several other great nations-not because the people of those nations disliked democracy, but because they had grown tired of unemployment and insecurity, of seeing their children hungry while they sat helpless in the face of government confusion and government weakness through lack of leadership in government. Finally, in desperation, they chose to sacrifice liberty in the hope of getting something to eat. We in America know that our own democratic institutions can be preserved and made to work. But in order to preserve them we need to act together, to meet the problems of the Nation boldly, and to prove that the practical operation of democratic government is equal to the task of protecting the security of the people."
3
The first big push for the Tea Party was the rant by Ric Santelli on the floor of the Chicago Board of Trade against President Obama's original plan for mortgage relief. The tenor of his rant was how dare this alien "subsidize the losers' mortgages." In one of the most obvious stage setups of all time, he had a group of traders cheering him on. The rant was encouraged by comments Trump's Commerce Secretary Wilbur Ross made in the studio. If you have forgotten, it is on YouTube. From that day on, the Republicans fought and made impossible any attempt at substantive mortgage relief, yet they blamed Obama for the lack of it.
As an unemployed white Southerner of 60, I know the people angered at "line-jumpers" quite well. They have been prevalent since my childhood and all the way back to and before Jackson. I regret that many of my ancestors fall into that category, even my mother's New England ancestors.
What Lydon Johnson once said about racism remains true: "If you can convince the lowest white man he's better than the best colored man, he won't notice you're picking his pocket. Hell, give him somebody to look down on, and he'll empty his pockets for you."
The sociology Edsall discusses here has, for too long, been used by the right as a manual of abuse against all of us, wherever we stand in line. It is also underlies their "they made me do it" excuse. My Pilgrim and Puritan ancestors were masters at identity politics. In our time, conservatives are the experts.
As an unemployed white Southerner of 60, I know the people angered at "line-jumpers" quite well. They have been prevalent since my childhood and all the way back to and before Jackson. I regret that many of my ancestors fall into that category, even my mother's New England ancestors.
What Lydon Johnson once said about racism remains true: "If you can convince the lowest white man he's better than the best colored man, he won't notice you're picking his pocket. Hell, give him somebody to look down on, and he'll empty his pockets for you."
The sociology Edsall discusses here has, for too long, been used by the right as a manual of abuse against all of us, wherever we stand in line. It is also underlies their "they made me do it" excuse. My Pilgrim and Puritan ancestors were masters at identity politics. In our time, conservatives are the experts.
10
Based on my childhood in several of the "forgotten" places and now living in an area of "liberal elites", it is clear to me there is some truth to this article...BUT, I think it's a stretch to think Trump supporters voted for ideas. They voted for a strongman - a guy who said "I alone can fix this for you!"
Convenient:
(1) they're looking for a savior so he gets their votes (they're faith-based folks, they believe in miracles),
(2) a vote for Trump absolves them of any perceived "fault" they may have for their problems and - more importantly - releases them from future "responsibility" to fix their situation...Trump's going to do that for them, they've outsourced it
(3) blaming economic woes on immigrants, refugees, blacks and latinos, women, etc. is easy to do; it's hard to measure yet anyone can be talked into "seeing that it's true"
and
(4) last but not least - because Trump is saying "look over here at these folks taking your jobs, etc.", they're not looking at Trump's other hand, out of which he's giving yet more tax breaks to the wealthy (who don't need more, though they always want more)
By putting the rich first, the GOP has let down these folks for decades. Funneling money up the ladder to the rich means that money cannot be used for social support, medical care, more affordable student loans, job retraining programs, mortgage refinancing, debt and credit counseling, business assistance, etc. that would make a positive difference in these people's lives.
Convenient:
(1) they're looking for a savior so he gets their votes (they're faith-based folks, they believe in miracles),
(2) a vote for Trump absolves them of any perceived "fault" they may have for their problems and - more importantly - releases them from future "responsibility" to fix their situation...Trump's going to do that for them, they've outsourced it
(3) blaming economic woes on immigrants, refugees, blacks and latinos, women, etc. is easy to do; it's hard to measure yet anyone can be talked into "seeing that it's true"
and
(4) last but not least - because Trump is saying "look over here at these folks taking your jobs, etc.", they're not looking at Trump's other hand, out of which he's giving yet more tax breaks to the wealthy (who don't need more, though they always want more)
By putting the rich first, the GOP has let down these folks for decades. Funneling money up the ladder to the rich means that money cannot be used for social support, medical care, more affordable student loans, job retraining programs, mortgage refinancing, debt and credit counseling, business assistance, etc. that would make a positive difference in these people's lives.
11
Before D Trumps’s shocking election, Senator Corey Booker was on television talking about how it wasn’t enough that citizens tolerated one another. According to him, they had to love one another.
This was a remarkable statement coming from a Senator for its naivete, whom until that moment I held in high regard. Because it showed a complete lack of introspection. He didn’t realize he was judging and condemning a lot of people for judging and condemning. The same thing could be set of Hillary Clinton and her deplorable speech. And the same motif runs all through the Democrats platforms.
Somewhere liberals have to accept that not everyone shares their sentiments. Often with legitimate reasons. Foisting those ‘liberal’ values on top of all the difficult financial situations was and is pouring salt on open wounds.
I sometimes wonder that the leaders coming up today having grown up with televisions are unable to distinguish between reality and televisions ‘fairy tales’.
Lib’s today are like little kids who having watched an episode of Superman, tie a towel around their neck to resemble a cape and leap out a window thinking they can fly; worse yet they want us to do the same.
This was a remarkable statement coming from a Senator for its naivete, whom until that moment I held in high regard. Because it showed a complete lack of introspection. He didn’t realize he was judging and condemning a lot of people for judging and condemning. The same thing could be set of Hillary Clinton and her deplorable speech. And the same motif runs all through the Democrats platforms.
Somewhere liberals have to accept that not everyone shares their sentiments. Often with legitimate reasons. Foisting those ‘liberal’ values on top of all the difficult financial situations was and is pouring salt on open wounds.
I sometimes wonder that the leaders coming up today having grown up with televisions are unable to distinguish between reality and televisions ‘fairy tales’.
Lib’s today are like little kids who having watched an episode of Superman, tie a towel around their neck to resemble a cape and leap out a window thinking they can fly; worse yet they want us to do the same.
2
It is hard to read Edsall's columns, since they mix sound statistical reasoning with the kind of unsound, suggestive stats that prompted Mark Twain to comment: "There are three kinds of lies: lies, damned lies, and statistics."
First and foremost is the ever-present tendency to use statistical correlations to suggest causation, as Edsall does when suggesting that the correlation between underwater mortgages and Trump votes is evidence that one is a cause, or "predictor," of the other. (In case you forgot, stable correlations can be used as "predictors" in the sense that if hemline heights reliably cycle at a given yearly pace they can be used to predict other things that reliably cycle at the same pace. But since neither causally influences the other, the word "predictor" is misleading, because it suggests that one is a "sign of" (that is, causally influenced by) the other.)
Note another problem: Being none-too wise about finances can explain the debt-vote correlation. The same basis on which a person puts too much trust in shoddy deals leads to bad mortgages and votes for demagogic presidents.
The point is not that these other suggestions are the correct ones. It's that correlations are being cited as strong evidence of causes when they are not. They are only, repeat: only correlations. Add confirmation bias to the mix, and we have a powerful elixir.
First and foremost is the ever-present tendency to use statistical correlations to suggest causation, as Edsall does when suggesting that the correlation between underwater mortgages and Trump votes is evidence that one is a cause, or "predictor," of the other. (In case you forgot, stable correlations can be used as "predictors" in the sense that if hemline heights reliably cycle at a given yearly pace they can be used to predict other things that reliably cycle at the same pace. But since neither causally influences the other, the word "predictor" is misleading, because it suggests that one is a "sign of" (that is, causally influenced by) the other.)
Note another problem: Being none-too wise about finances can explain the debt-vote correlation. The same basis on which a person puts too much trust in shoddy deals leads to bad mortgages and votes for demagogic presidents.
The point is not that these other suggestions are the correct ones. It's that correlations are being cited as strong evidence of causes when they are not. They are only, repeat: only correlations. Add confirmation bias to the mix, and we have a powerful elixir.
2
What's missing here is that a so-called "Constitutional Crisis" is just what the doctor ordered.
Ever since Nixon bombed Cambodia, and, in fact, ever since the CIA was created and the Shadow Government was installed, we've seen a relentless shift to the unitary executive the Constitution was designed to protect us from. It is absolutely sickening that the Congress and the Courts have been complicit.
The best way to deal with a bully is to knock him in the nose. Perhaps we might see some fight in the Congress and the Courts -- though no one should put any faith in that. Look at those people. They are the true deplorables.
However, we can put our faith in the Constitution. Towards this end, we need to stop listening to nattering nabobs of negativity at the NY Times about how the Constitution is a living, breathing document which must be interpreted by the present (i.e., in the manner that suits left wing social engineering).
On the other hand, if we're being rational, we should consider the possibility that Trump is onto something. Maybe the time has come for someone with the courage of his convictions to show the way forward, never mind the howls of the political class and their propagandists. Maybe we should embrace the change everyone is always screaming for.
Surely, we can agree that things couldn't go on the way they were?
Ever since Nixon bombed Cambodia, and, in fact, ever since the CIA was created and the Shadow Government was installed, we've seen a relentless shift to the unitary executive the Constitution was designed to protect us from. It is absolutely sickening that the Congress and the Courts have been complicit.
The best way to deal with a bully is to knock him in the nose. Perhaps we might see some fight in the Congress and the Courts -- though no one should put any faith in that. Look at those people. They are the true deplorables.
However, we can put our faith in the Constitution. Towards this end, we need to stop listening to nattering nabobs of negativity at the NY Times about how the Constitution is a living, breathing document which must be interpreted by the present (i.e., in the manner that suits left wing social engineering).
On the other hand, if we're being rational, we should consider the possibility that Trump is onto something. Maybe the time has come for someone with the courage of his convictions to show the way forward, never mind the howls of the political class and their propagandists. Maybe we should embrace the change everyone is always screaming for.
Surely, we can agree that things couldn't go on the way they were?
1
This entire discussion of Materialism and Post-Materialism makes no sense. Obviously it doesn't refer to the Marxist concept of Materialism vs Idealism, and if the suggestion is being made that consumerism-- the more popular concept of materialism, the placing of great importance on the accumulation of things-- let up to some degree at any time between WWII and the present one would have to be delusional to postulate such an opinion.
The forces pushing the latter form of materialism have only continued to pick up momentum with each passing year. The mere fact that the act of coming into possession of material has become more difficult as the income gap has widened doesn't mean that those who have not do not want to have. Suggesting that the self-realization movements that emerged from the social transformations in the 60s lessened the urge to consume cannot be taken seriously. There were beads and bell bottoms to buy, and rock albums, and stereo equipment, and posters and VW buses at the very least.
The reason for the rise in the dystopian populism we are seeing today is a lack of understanding of political economy and of history. Family farms and factory towns have been disappearing for decades as larger tractors and union busting were undertaken by the ones increasing the gap between the rich and the poor. I think the author of this piece needs to go back to the drawing board with his analysis. He has not only over simplified the matter but missed the target entirely.
The forces pushing the latter form of materialism have only continued to pick up momentum with each passing year. The mere fact that the act of coming into possession of material has become more difficult as the income gap has widened doesn't mean that those who have not do not want to have. Suggesting that the self-realization movements that emerged from the social transformations in the 60s lessened the urge to consume cannot be taken seriously. There were beads and bell bottoms to buy, and rock albums, and stereo equipment, and posters and VW buses at the very least.
The reason for the rise in the dystopian populism we are seeing today is a lack of understanding of political economy and of history. Family farms and factory towns have been disappearing for decades as larger tractors and union busting were undertaken by the ones increasing the gap between the rich and the poor. I think the author of this piece needs to go back to the drawing board with his analysis. He has not only over simplified the matter but missed the target entirely.
3
In response to Ben who writes
Quit thinking of ideas and politics. This is a cult of personality.
Years ago Cokie Roberts observed that Americans vote for candidates according what they say. Except in Presidential elections. Here they vote for what they are not what they say.
There are valid sociological reasons for that. No one knows what a President will be faced with once in office.
At that point, it comes down to personality.
Quit thinking of ideas and politics. This is a cult of personality.
Years ago Cokie Roberts observed that Americans vote for candidates according what they say. Except in Presidential elections. Here they vote for what they are not what they say.
There are valid sociological reasons for that. No one knows what a President will be faced with once in office.
At that point, it comes down to personality.
The Cultural Revolution didn't work out for Mao and it isn;t going to work out for Trump. We don't have dictatorship.
Trump will be impeached and removed from office.
Trump will be impeached and removed from office.
1
Trump sold himself as a brand. Coca Cola, Apple, Toyota.
If you have these products and are satisfied, then any attack against them seems silly and you just keep buying the product. Attacks against Trump make no 'common sense' to his supporters. Trump only gains and rarely loses a supporter. 'You iPhone is useless' and ' Trump is an evil monster' do ZERO to persude anyone to switch.
The reality is that the only reason for a Trump supporter to switch is if someone offers a better alternative for their specific needs. The Democrats have stopped listening so how can they posdibly know what those needs are?
Trump and the Republicans are going to win a supermajority in the Senate in 2018 because they 'listen'.
If you have these products and are satisfied, then any attack against them seems silly and you just keep buying the product. Attacks against Trump make no 'common sense' to his supporters. Trump only gains and rarely loses a supporter. 'You iPhone is useless' and ' Trump is an evil monster' do ZERO to persude anyone to switch.
The reality is that the only reason for a Trump supporter to switch is if someone offers a better alternative for their specific needs. The Democrats have stopped listening so how can they posdibly know what those needs are?
Trump and the Republicans are going to win a supermajority in the Senate in 2018 because they 'listen'.
Thomas Edsall begins with a blatant lie, that "the Democratic Party in the United States...shifted (its) interest away from economic policies."
Nothing could be further from the truth. It wasn't Democrats who attacked unions, and passed legislation to break them, it was Republicans. It wasn't Democrats who attacked the minimum wage in state after state, it was Republicans. It wasn't Democrats who destroyed financial support for public universities and colleges, it was Republicans.
Democrats have never "shifted their interest away from economic policies" that would support hard-pressed middle- and lower-income Americans. It has always been the Republicans.
Yet another blatantly dishonest column in The Times. Sad to see this newspaper pander to the far right.
Nothing could be further from the truth. It wasn't Democrats who attacked unions, and passed legislation to break them, it was Republicans. It wasn't Democrats who attacked the minimum wage in state after state, it was Republicans. It wasn't Democrats who destroyed financial support for public universities and colleges, it was Republicans.
Democrats have never "shifted their interest away from economic policies" that would support hard-pressed middle- and lower-income Americans. It has always been the Republicans.
Yet another blatantly dishonest column in The Times. Sad to see this newspaper pander to the far right.
8
You can be sure that Steve Bannon, a board member of Cambridge Analytica (SCL), is well aware of the key economic and demographic highlighted and exactly how to use it to get a political outcome.
We live in the age of Big Data, and voter manipulation is very real.
"SCL’s involvement in the political world has been primarily in the developing world where it has been used by the military and politicians to study and manipulate public opinion and political will. SCL claims to have been successful to help foment coups."
Of course, that would sound like a movie plot, another of Mr. Bannon's life experiences were it not for the fact that SCL did enter the US markets in 2012, 2014 and of course was part of the 2016 Trump victory.
And should you want to see where else they've weaved their plots, they also worked on Brexit.
After Trump's win, Matthew Oczkowski, Head of Product for CA, indicated that "our internal data showed the race tightening in the last few weeks of the election because of previously hidden trends within voter sampling and demographic abnormalities in absentee ballots and early voting (particularly in rural areas). These trends, in part, were responsible for the boost towards the president-elect in the industrial Midwest. Our models predicted most of the late movement correctly." Alexander Nix indicated that CA's involvement took an "instrumental part" in the win.
The fix is in; resistance will soon be futile. Democracy needs a tune-up now.
We live in the age of Big Data, and voter manipulation is very real.
"SCL’s involvement in the political world has been primarily in the developing world where it has been used by the military and politicians to study and manipulate public opinion and political will. SCL claims to have been successful to help foment coups."
Of course, that would sound like a movie plot, another of Mr. Bannon's life experiences were it not for the fact that SCL did enter the US markets in 2012, 2014 and of course was part of the 2016 Trump victory.
And should you want to see where else they've weaved their plots, they also worked on Brexit.
After Trump's win, Matthew Oczkowski, Head of Product for CA, indicated that "our internal data showed the race tightening in the last few weeks of the election because of previously hidden trends within voter sampling and demographic abnormalities in absentee ballots and early voting (particularly in rural areas). These trends, in part, were responsible for the boost towards the president-elect in the industrial Midwest. Our models predicted most of the late movement correctly." Alexander Nix indicated that CA's involvement took an "instrumental part" in the win.
The fix is in; resistance will soon be futile. Democracy needs a tune-up now.
2
I don't see this as a truly "populist" movement, but a "reactionary" one that perfectly fits our 21st-century circumstances. There is no "common man" in our diverse American culture, but various subgroups whose members are reacting to truly planetary change. Globalism will suffice as the overall rubric. Climate change will serve as the unsettling backdrop and symbolism of sweeping, truly "disruptive," change. Planetary overpopulation is the seldom-mentioned and unmanaged element that feeds pockets of strife, hunger, and need.
Yes, our domestic situation is strained by change and its benefits and deficits--as always, unevenly distributed. Our politics have been whipsawed over the past 50 years, with sharp and unplanned changes in national leadership, "national" goals, and altered stances in domestic and international affairs. These changes have meant that there IS no "national policy," no enduring trajectory, in either the economy, legal principles, social policy, defense/war, or many other elements of what would constitute a fairly reliable and unchanging sense of "The United States of America." Above all factors, the economic one is greatest. We are seeing the results of a laissez faire system of capital and an unmanaged and ill-considered "system" of allocation of resources that values the individual, corporations, and profit far above the nurturing of human resources. Trumpism collects the vague unease/unrest that are rooted in all these grreat events and trends.
Yes, our domestic situation is strained by change and its benefits and deficits--as always, unevenly distributed. Our politics have been whipsawed over the past 50 years, with sharp and unplanned changes in national leadership, "national" goals, and altered stances in domestic and international affairs. These changes have meant that there IS no "national policy," no enduring trajectory, in either the economy, legal principles, social policy, defense/war, or many other elements of what would constitute a fairly reliable and unchanging sense of "The United States of America." Above all factors, the economic one is greatest. We are seeing the results of a laissez faire system of capital and an unmanaged and ill-considered "system" of allocation of resources that values the individual, corporations, and profit far above the nurturing of human resources. Trumpism collects the vague unease/unrest that are rooted in all these grreat events and trends.
3
I understand the need for survival, but the idolization of money in this country has gotten out of hand - even among the middle and upper class. It is poisoning our society.
Several causes:
- Our capitalistic system, where profit equals success
- Madison Avenue - whose message is "you don't have enough"
- Our greedy politicians - poor role models
- Our economic structure - where the rich get richer
- TV and internet - breeding envy by showcasing the "undeserving" rich.
As a counter-balance, we need to grow the spiritual side of life. It's too bad religion is gradually being replaced by materialism.
Several causes:
- Our capitalistic system, where profit equals success
- Madison Avenue - whose message is "you don't have enough"
- Our greedy politicians - poor role models
- Our economic structure - where the rich get richer
- TV and internet - breeding envy by showcasing the "undeserving" rich.
As a counter-balance, we need to grow the spiritual side of life. It's too bad religion is gradually being replaced by materialism.
3
Trump is not a populist he is a total fraud.
His policies do not support the 98% they support racists and zealots and takers
Those that voted for him or chose not to vote are going to get it. Not in the way they think of course...but they will get it
The question I have is will they learn?
Will they participate in the next election?
Will they believe what they hear?
Will they vote their best interests?
Please save us - participate
His policies do not support the 98% they support racists and zealots and takers
Those that voted for him or chose not to vote are going to get it. Not in the way they think of course...but they will get it
The question I have is will they learn?
Will they participate in the next election?
Will they believe what they hear?
Will they vote their best interests?
Please save us - participate
4
The author is correct to try and ferret out the cause of the phenomenon we are confronted with, but to try and do so while rationalizing that liberals were correct and merely overlooked something is to not look far enough. The fact that Liberals control the media and can give the appearance in Hollywood, the news and elsewhere, that the cultural Left won is just that, an appearance. The cry against "fake news" is as much the cry that through social media, traditional, mainstream controlled media are being subverted and people are insisting on what they've always wanted, which is not in line with the program planned for them.
The curtain has been pulled aside and what has it revealed? That the Western World is in decline and the standard of living of those living not just in the West, and those that have enjoyed the flow of wealth from the West as well. Many changes are indeed occurring, and they all lead to impoverishment. The young and college educated have less than they did a decade ago, let alone two decades ago and why they should merely be taken as acceptable is a mystery. Immigration (tech sector, engineering, medicine) and automation are allowed to "progress" and leave economic devastation in their wake. People should accept this meekly--not!
The real trouble here is that Trump can only be trusted to serve himself, but then that was true of the DNC too, and no, I haven't forgotten.
The curtain has been pulled aside and what has it revealed? That the Western World is in decline and the standard of living of those living not just in the West, and those that have enjoyed the flow of wealth from the West as well. Many changes are indeed occurring, and they all lead to impoverishment. The young and college educated have less than they did a decade ago, let alone two decades ago and why they should merely be taken as acceptable is a mystery. Immigration (tech sector, engineering, medicine) and automation are allowed to "progress" and leave economic devastation in their wake. People should accept this meekly--not!
The real trouble here is that Trump can only be trusted to serve himself, but then that was true of the DNC too, and no, I haven't forgotten.
1
.
Here Edsall gropes at an explanation for the current culture war, but misses the mark by exploring poverty, immigration, racism, religion, even real-estate values as potential sources.
The real source: the matriarchal shift. That is, the gradual but persistent implementation of matriarchal values into our laws, institutions, media, academia and the general zeitgeist. This could be a constructive, beneficial process, but unfortunately it has been largely unproductive -- even destructive.
This culture war is a gender war. Don’t be confused by smokescreens thrown up to cloud the difficult truth. This is a values war between patriarchal and matriarchal perspectives of life.
A problem: When power is given to those who demand it, but have not the wisdom to exercise it, chaos and confusion results.
The ability to process the ideas and stimuli that flow into our awareness/consciousness is one part rational/logical/thinking and one part emotional/feeling/intuition (awareness = thinking --- feeling). Men and women have both aspects and each individual can develop empathy as well as logic, but it is clear that at this point in human evolution/development, there is a distinction between the genders. Reason and evidence must be emphasized over emotion and feeling.
Another problem: now that the irrational aspect of humanity has been unleashed, how do you bring this phenomenon to a balance point? How do you put the emotional genie back in the rational bottle?
Here Edsall gropes at an explanation for the current culture war, but misses the mark by exploring poverty, immigration, racism, religion, even real-estate values as potential sources.
The real source: the matriarchal shift. That is, the gradual but persistent implementation of matriarchal values into our laws, institutions, media, academia and the general zeitgeist. This could be a constructive, beneficial process, but unfortunately it has been largely unproductive -- even destructive.
This culture war is a gender war. Don’t be confused by smokescreens thrown up to cloud the difficult truth. This is a values war between patriarchal and matriarchal perspectives of life.
A problem: When power is given to those who demand it, but have not the wisdom to exercise it, chaos and confusion results.
The ability to process the ideas and stimuli that flow into our awareness/consciousness is one part rational/logical/thinking and one part emotional/feeling/intuition (awareness = thinking --- feeling). Men and women have both aspects and each individual can develop empathy as well as logic, but it is clear that at this point in human evolution/development, there is a distinction between the genders. Reason and evidence must be emphasized over emotion and feeling.
Another problem: now that the irrational aspect of humanity has been unleashed, how do you bring this phenomenon to a balance point? How do you put the emotional genie back in the rational bottle?
2
Ironically, the very success of Metro areas, particularly on the coasts, makes them increasingly unaffordable, especially to Millennials - many of whom supported Bernie Sanders. Since Sanders lost there is less focus paid now to his followers - yet I suspect many represent the resistance to Trump while feeling little affinity for the Democratic Party, especially its establishment.
Fractures abound. Many progressive Millennials in Portland want to essentially redevelop vintage 100 year close in neighborhoods to create more housing on the hunch it would be more affordable. Older liberals decry demolition of charming homes and resent accusations of NIMBYism and exclusion. It's just one tectonic example.
I was young yet remember the turmoil of the late 60's and early 70's. Seeing Sproul Plaza light up last night reminds me of the comparative quiet that we've had for decades. Sure we've had movements and marches and always will - methinks this is different.
Donald Trump is a return not to Nixon so much, but to Spiro Agnew. Read Agnew's quotes - today they are updated and nurtured by a much more charismatic carrier.
As always, a fascinating column Mr. Edsall.
Fractures abound. Many progressive Millennials in Portland want to essentially redevelop vintage 100 year close in neighborhoods to create more housing on the hunch it would be more affordable. Older liberals decry demolition of charming homes and resent accusations of NIMBYism and exclusion. It's just one tectonic example.
I was young yet remember the turmoil of the late 60's and early 70's. Seeing Sproul Plaza light up last night reminds me of the comparative quiet that we've had for decades. Sure we've had movements and marches and always will - methinks this is different.
Donald Trump is a return not to Nixon so much, but to Spiro Agnew. Read Agnew's quotes - today they are updated and nurtured by a much more charismatic carrier.
As always, a fascinating column Mr. Edsall.
Edsall's sources uncover interesting connections between economic change and cultural trends. According to them, Trump's supporters attribute the growth in economic inequality to liberal preference for the needs of ethnic and religious minorities ("line-jumpers"), as well as to the Democrats' tendency to identify more closely with foreigners and other nations than with their own fellow citizens. A persuasive analysis, but it omits the religious dimension. Many supporters of the current administration clearly believe that, especially on the abortion and gay-rights issues, Democrats have violated God's will. The hedonistic Trump, by contrast, at least mouthes the right words about the legitimacy of abortion
Democrats cannot appease evangelicals on gay rights and abortion, without jettisoning their own principles. They could, however, vigorously contest Trump's explanation of the causes of America's economic difficulties. A sustained effort to appeal to all elements of the working class, regardless of ethnicity, through job retraining and the expansion of the alternative fuels industries, has the potential to heal the artificial divisions which Trump and the GOP have exploited. An approach which combined these initiatives with a comprehensive plan to restore and upgrade our infrastructure could replace the jobs lost in older industries, while also demonstrating to alienated voters that the federal government placed the interests of our citizens first.
Democrats cannot appease evangelicals on gay rights and abortion, without jettisoning their own principles. They could, however, vigorously contest Trump's explanation of the causes of America's economic difficulties. A sustained effort to appeal to all elements of the working class, regardless of ethnicity, through job retraining and the expansion of the alternative fuels industries, has the potential to heal the artificial divisions which Trump and the GOP have exploited. An approach which combined these initiatives with a comprehensive plan to restore and upgrade our infrastructure could replace the jobs lost in older industries, while also demonstrating to alienated voters that the federal government placed the interests of our citizens first.
I would especially support two themes in these comments: 1) The Republican Congress gummed up the works for so long that people just wanted change; they hated Washington. I'm not at all convinced that those Midwest counties that switched from Obama to Trump would have supported a third term for Obama. They wanted change!
2) The Republican establishment voters were in the end all in for Donald Trump. They were smart enough to see that he would pursue all the voodoo economics that they cherish.
How does one change minds? Two Trump voters I know show my frustration in answering that. One is a young West Virginia man who works for a federal regulatory agency. He is filled with anti-government feeling and gung ho for his guns. Another is a retired small-town Ohio man, with only a high school education, who had a plum government job all his life, ending at $42 an hour and a substantial pension. An otherwise Democrat, he says that he is bothered that his own sons, also with high-school education, do not have the well-paying job he had. He shrugs off concerns with the idea that "if Trump doesn't work out, we can switch next time." It seems not to faze him that a lot of things can not easily be undone, including the fiscal irresponsibility that Republican administrations have shown for 30 years.
2) The Republican establishment voters were in the end all in for Donald Trump. They were smart enough to see that he would pursue all the voodoo economics that they cherish.
How does one change minds? Two Trump voters I know show my frustration in answering that. One is a young West Virginia man who works for a federal regulatory agency. He is filled with anti-government feeling and gung ho for his guns. Another is a retired small-town Ohio man, with only a high school education, who had a plum government job all his life, ending at $42 an hour and a substantial pension. An otherwise Democrat, he says that he is bothered that his own sons, also with high-school education, do not have the well-paying job he had. He shrugs off concerns with the idea that "if Trump doesn't work out, we can switch next time." It seems not to faze him that a lot of things can not easily be undone, including the fiscal irresponsibility that Republican administrations have shown for 30 years.
6
Globalization is a mixed blessing. As resources move and new markets open up formerly impoverished area are pulled out of poverty but often at the expense of formerly well off areas. Those who control the capital make money. Labor costs decline and consumers in formerly non-existent markets can now buy products. The economics are simple for those who can recognize an opportunity and take advantage of it.
With the free movement of resources comes exposure to others cultures and ideas. This has been a strength of our nation of immigrants, but never without resistance from the folks who got here first. Liberals have made it a point to promote a diversity of ideas and cultures while moving economic issues to the back burner. Ask Bernie.
The elite have recognized the left’s new interest in social issues as an opportunity to weaken unions and suppress wages. They have leveraged their political power through gerrymandering and voter suppression laws. They have taken control of the message by acquiring news and media outlets. Donald Trump supplied the colorful spark, condemning many of the business practices he has used accumulating his wealth, violating the moral norms he claims to espouse, changing his core values when convenient but always directing attention to the scape goat, liberals and “the other”. The one per centers weren’t sure they could control him, but you don’t get rich by passing up opportunities and shying away from a little risk.
With the free movement of resources comes exposure to others cultures and ideas. This has been a strength of our nation of immigrants, but never without resistance from the folks who got here first. Liberals have made it a point to promote a diversity of ideas and cultures while moving economic issues to the back burner. Ask Bernie.
The elite have recognized the left’s new interest in social issues as an opportunity to weaken unions and suppress wages. They have leveraged their political power through gerrymandering and voter suppression laws. They have taken control of the message by acquiring news and media outlets. Donald Trump supplied the colorful spark, condemning many of the business practices he has used accumulating his wealth, violating the moral norms he claims to espouse, changing his core values when convenient but always directing attention to the scape goat, liberals and “the other”. The one per centers weren’t sure they could control him, but you don’t get rich by passing up opportunities and shying away from a little risk.
2
What is intriguing is how relatively badly fared progressive (senate) candidates who challenged the power elite's domination of the status quo and corruption in politics by a rhetorical emphasis upon these facts alone. They seemed to be incapable of communicating effectively the links between this coddling of the elite and the damage this does to the economic interests of the white exurban-rural working voter.
Instead such progressives could not repel the "values oriented" attacks of their being elites themselves, out of touch with the lives and interests
of such voters, and protecting instead the interests of "the coddled others",
that is, those groups who are direct competitors for the few crumbs allowed to be thrown in their direction by the elite.
This revealed not only
the efficacy of such campaign posturing but also that of right wing radio and
media news outlets that reinforced these linguistic tar and featherings with years and years of endlessly repetitive propaganda.
The success in attacking progressive, social welfare oriented positions by use of standard right wing attacks on big government and "socialist evil liberals" reflects a profound disconnect between the perceptions of class economic anxiety and power imbalances. The democrat senate candidates who lost as "progressives" lost to non populists, economically.
The current schisms will only reconnect when the massive
chaos already underway hits the brick wall called reality.
Instead such progressives could not repel the "values oriented" attacks of their being elites themselves, out of touch with the lives and interests
of such voters, and protecting instead the interests of "the coddled others",
that is, those groups who are direct competitors for the few crumbs allowed to be thrown in their direction by the elite.
This revealed not only
the efficacy of such campaign posturing but also that of right wing radio and
media news outlets that reinforced these linguistic tar and featherings with years and years of endlessly repetitive propaganda.
The success in attacking progressive, social welfare oriented positions by use of standard right wing attacks on big government and "socialist evil liberals" reflects a profound disconnect between the perceptions of class economic anxiety and power imbalances. The democrat senate candidates who lost as "progressives" lost to non populists, economically.
The current schisms will only reconnect when the massive
chaos already underway hits the brick wall called reality.
I thought we were a better country than this. Trump apparently punctured the thin veneer of civilization that sits atop the sea of barbarism in human nature. In the movie "Gladiator" it was about control of "the mob" and Trump appears to have that now. Those who voted for him should be ashamed of themselves.
The exit poll data indicates that those with less than $50k went from Clinton, while the $50-200k group went for Trump, so this wasn't really about economics. The people who voted for Trump are doing just fine.
It was about "Making America White Again" which is a sad commentary on the state of our country. Our education system apparently hasn't been good enough to immunize our population from the sort of lying nonsense Trump and Fox News spout almost continuously. And the spinelessness of the Electoral College indicates all of those folks need to be replaced pronto.
The exit poll data indicates that those with less than $50k went from Clinton, while the $50-200k group went for Trump, so this wasn't really about economics. The people who voted for Trump are doing just fine.
It was about "Making America White Again" which is a sad commentary on the state of our country. Our education system apparently hasn't been good enough to immunize our population from the sort of lying nonsense Trump and Fox News spout almost continuously. And the spinelessness of the Electoral College indicates all of those folks need to be replaced pronto.
3
Funny how 'up by your bootstraps' only seems to apply to black and brown people, isn't it?
4
This is hardly ground breaking thought. Buried in every trend are the seed of its own undoing. This maxim applies equally to commodity or other asset prices as it does to social constructs.
Nowhere is there mention of education. Given, that Trump would get all those blocks of voters who typically vote Republican-the Evangelical Vote, the 'Gun Right's types', et al, it's easy to understand that it was the 'low information' voter that ultimately swung the election in Trump's direction. And in the same breath I believe I can confidently say it's this block of voters who unknowingly got hoodwinked and will ultimately get the short end of the stick. 'Jobs, jobs, jobs' is what they heard from Trump. But what he was really telling them was 'lies, lies, lies.'
what I like about this article is, instead of an articulate lamentation about the situation faced by your country, it offers an interesting analysis of what happened. From that analysis, the left, hopefully, can rebuild.
The Republicans can hold on to and build from their core of racists, Southern slave states, riflemen, and religious fundamentalists. The Democrats can ,,,,,,,,,,( to be announced)
The Republicans can hold on to and build from their core of racists, Southern slave states, riflemen, and religious fundamentalists. The Democrats can ,,,,,,,,,,( to be announced)
1
There is something wrong with the graph showing underwater home mortgages compared to voting trends by county. It shows the U.S. average as being 12%. Counties voting Democratic in 2012 and 2016 average 12.1%, counties voting Republican in 2012 and 2016 are 14.2%, and counties voting Democratic in 2012 and Republican in 2016 are 14.6%. The only category left is counties voting Republican in 2012 and Democratic in 2016. In order for the average to be less than the other three categories those counties would have to be large in number and have a very low % of underwater mortgages and that is very unlikely to be true.
Sorry, I meant "Neither, though, is group (religious, ethnic, gender) disapprobation.
The peculiarness of the populism is that is was brought about by red state voters who have voted for years for people who supported legislation that hastened the demise of their way of life. And they are still voting for them. Now, they've voted for the biggest con job of all in order to "stick it to the man"- the very "man" they willingly gave and still are giving power to while he takes and takes and takes from them. They may figure it out when they hit even more rock bottom and the world around them is burning, but by then, it'll be much too late for all of us.
4
This is a great well-supported analysis of the motivations of one segment of Trump voters. But at our lasting peril we ignore the intense demonization of candidate Hillary Clinton, which echos the attempt to delegitimize Barack Obama throughout his presidency, which itself followed the endless investigations of Bill Clinton. We do not know who the Democrats will nominate in 2020, but we do know that person will be depicted as one of the worst possible human beings in history and, if the current president is in place to run, voter surveys will show that "Americans do not trust both candidates." Articles will be written about vote trading sites for people who can not bear to vote for the Democrat.
4
The word "Peculiar" would turn off some Trump supporters as being negative. But read the article one may feel okay with the observations. Nonetheless too much of splitting hair. The simplest fact is the majority voters made sure not to choose who will let the current form of government go on without significant course correction. People knew the nation as a whole is doing well, but the both the reasons and result are not relevant to them. They have been doing worse gradually. They don't see in their surroundings, except a few places like the Silicon Valley, stuff could turn positively. For those who are making money, they wonder if the businesses were indispensable. Trump not only presented as a changing agent, but is willing to bring about improvement to ordinary people at the expense of the doing well part of small US population, and that of current world order. It was difficult for the voters not to root for him. He seems to be the only hope, beyond which we might have to reckon there will be no hope. The soaring rhetoric of OB didn't translate to tangible reality so say the least. He tried hard. GOP had been a negative factor, why many people still sympathize with him. But Americans are impatient to hear excuses for the outcome. There is very little race factor in this whole ordeal.
As always, Mr Edsall, an interesting, well researched and developed article. However, this article does not address the Republican ability to get people to vote against their own economic best interest. I would submit that Trump did even better at this than some recent Republicans by not just using a few cultural hot topics but, more broadly, with his extreme anti-intellectualism about everything.
3
Rich or poor - and both voted from Trump - it's those who just love the guy. They love how he blasts the modern left - political correctness & identify politics - and his locker room, undignified, reality TV language. They will stick with him like glue matter what. If bad stuff happens, the left will still be blamed. That's it.
1
I am neither surprised nor dismayed by the 49% support for the travel ban. As implemented it is a disaster and will make us less safe, not more. But the principle holds: we are, to our great benefit, a multiethnic society, but we are not and should not strive to be a multicultural one.
As Edsall points out, material insecurity, a relative decline in income, etc. make many Americans angry at the establishment and "elites," and make people vote for a man who promises change. Trump, of course, is a charlatan who will not improve the lot of the ordinary American. But the American people have a point: Washington politicians have been complicit in the deindustrialization of the American rustbelt, the offshoring of jobs, and farm subsidies that benefit mostly large agribusiness instead of family farms and have resulted in huge dislocations, etc. Instead of implementing policies that provided govt healthcare, industry had to bear a lot of the cost of health insurance for workers; instead of govt spending on infrastructure, high-speed rail, free industrial and skills education at the high school and college level, etc. as Germany and other countries do, the US government was cutting govt services and implementing tax cuts that benefit mostly the wealthy for the better part of the past 40 years. So the people who have watched jobs offshored, family farms auctioned off, communities that look like ghost towns with store after store shuttered and their kids unable to stand on their own two feet to start their adult lives or taking minimum wage jobs in Wallmart (read "What's the Matter with Kansas") are right to be angry. But most never had the chance to vote for Bernie and many got conned by Trump.
2
Trump voters should have voted for Sanders, in other words.
These reported studies help to reveal the stark disparities between those cosmopolitan city dwellers, who are (wild guess) 10 to 15% of the populous and control more than half of the wealth of the nation, and the forgotten men and women of “TrumpWorld.” Another important take away from these studies is the stark, and accurate, accusation that the cosmopolitan left have dismissed certain values of these Trump denizens to their own hurt.
Some new bridge must be erected if we are all to see who is racing this country to the bottom, and it surely isn’t the immigrants, illegal or otherwise, or people of the Islamic faith (and by the way, there are no “radical Islamics,” only radical who misuse the faith, since when do we conflate such terms?)or the elitist left. We have always been a nation of immigrants, the fact that this president was voted in based on anti-immigration is stunning and shows how out of touch with reality we are. The fact that the left ignores these people shows how out of touch with reality we are. We seem to still be in that cave Plato contemplated so long ago.
Some new bridge must be erected if we are all to see who is racing this country to the bottom, and it surely isn’t the immigrants, illegal or otherwise, or people of the Islamic faith (and by the way, there are no “radical Islamics,” only radical who misuse the faith, since when do we conflate such terms?)or the elitist left. We have always been a nation of immigrants, the fact that this president was voted in based on anti-immigration is stunning and shows how out of touch with reality we are. The fact that the left ignores these people shows how out of touch with reality we are. We seem to still be in that cave Plato contemplated so long ago.
1
The opposition to Donald Trump increases by the hour. Peculiar Populism? No- madness. The chorus of opposition will not always be boisterous. It will come in the form of signature(s) of Conservative Republican Justices on rulings that speak as loud as a bullhorn.
1
You speak about contempt for intellectuals and I've seen that everywhere on social media. But if one tries to follow the logic of blaming immigrants and other marginalized groups for "jumping the line" and garnering benefits that were purportedly being withheld from Trump's supporters in the heartland, the entire argument falls to the ground. Bernie Sanders' campaign articulated this very clearly: the transference of wealth in this country is not from working people to marginalized groups but upward, toward the wealthiest. Under Trump, that transference of wealth has just had its wheels greased, with the dissolution of environmental and labor protections and the elevation of Tillerson to Secretary of State. Do immigrants and minorities have huge influential PACs and lobbyists? Are they determining policy? When have they ever had enough power to do so? Who then has enough power to take jobs away from the red states, to shut down factories and mines and other businesses? Only wealthy owners of such entities can do that--so let's elect one of them President! And then he can put lots of other wealthy people who have never done a single day of public service in power and they'll all look out for us poo,r unemployed, opioid-addicted Middle Americans! How can people reach the logical conclusion that Trump is their champion? Through wilfull disregard of his personal history and allowing themselves to hate and scapegoat people who are just as powerless as they are.
5
The arguments are all quintessentially economic. Insecurity and immigration phobia are based on the economy and the disappearance of the 1950s like American Dream. Certainly Trump's main appeal was an economic one. He was going to shake up an unequal market place and bring the American Dream back. Of course xenophobia and racist bigotry are the motivators on who to blame for this perceived paradise lost. Another thing that is not mentioned is the fact that the Ds won the popular vote by 3 million votes. Trump got in on a fluke provided by the electoral college. Hillary Clinton didn't inspire the electorate, in fact her venality and her connection with the ruling elite, got her labeled as a part of the tired elite. So the Ds left themselves vulnerable. Trump is no populist as his cabinet selections amply show. Trump's immature obsession with all things Trump seems to indicate that issues of great import will be caught up into how they feed his ego.
"2016 exit poll data showing that Hillary Clinton won voters who said the economy was the most important issue by 11 points, 52-41, while Trump carried those who said immigration was the most important issue facing the country by nearly two to one, 64-33."
As this illustrates, and is so clearly supported by Clinton's policy proposals
https://www.hillaryclinton.com/issues/,
Democrats DO focus on the concerns of those who feel "left behind" and support effective policy initiatives.
However, for the "left behind", who should in fact be outraged at consistent Republican votes that undermine their economic security while enriching the Republicans' wealthy donors, Republicans have always been effective at diverting anger away from the actual cause of their economic struggles on to a group of "the other" whether it is "commies" blacks, uppity women, Mexicans or other immigrants, gay marriage, or Muslims
As this illustrates, and is so clearly supported by Clinton's policy proposals
https://www.hillaryclinton.com/issues/,
Democrats DO focus on the concerns of those who feel "left behind" and support effective policy initiatives.
However, for the "left behind", who should in fact be outraged at consistent Republican votes that undermine their economic security while enriching the Republicans' wealthy donors, Republicans have always been effective at diverting anger away from the actual cause of their economic struggles on to a group of "the other" whether it is "commies" blacks, uppity women, Mexicans or other immigrants, gay marriage, or Muslims
14
There are important ways in which immigration and the economy are related.
I grew up in Houston during the fifties, sixties, and seventies. So over time I began to view fear and hostility towards people who are black, Hispanic, or gay as a very odd thing.
When news reports began to tell of hostility towards Hispanics on the east coast or in the Midwest I thought to myself, once again, that many straight white working class Houstonians are more broadly cosmopolitan in outlook than a lot of people in supposedly more civilized parts of the country.
But then there were reports of immigration raids on meat packing plants in the shadow of the rust belt and the textile belt.
Hmm. That doesn't sound to me like jobs no American would take. And not long ago there was that piece on the white collar pharmaceutical employee in Chicago whose last duties involved training his replacement, here on an H 1B visa. I didn't think that was what those sorts of visas were for.
Do you not agree it was the job of the Democratic Party as an institution to find a way to allow most of the benefits of freer trade and more open borders while still looking out for the interests of existing American labor? And that they should have loudly made a political issue of this while carefully guarding against xenophobia?
I grew up in Houston during the fifties, sixties, and seventies. So over time I began to view fear and hostility towards people who are black, Hispanic, or gay as a very odd thing.
When news reports began to tell of hostility towards Hispanics on the east coast or in the Midwest I thought to myself, once again, that many straight white working class Houstonians are more broadly cosmopolitan in outlook than a lot of people in supposedly more civilized parts of the country.
But then there were reports of immigration raids on meat packing plants in the shadow of the rust belt and the textile belt.
Hmm. That doesn't sound to me like jobs no American would take. And not long ago there was that piece on the white collar pharmaceutical employee in Chicago whose last duties involved training his replacement, here on an H 1B visa. I didn't think that was what those sorts of visas were for.
Do you not agree it was the job of the Democratic Party as an institution to find a way to allow most of the benefits of freer trade and more open borders while still looking out for the interests of existing American labor? And that they should have loudly made a political issue of this while carefully guarding against xenophobia?
2
Unfortunately, people just didn't trust Clinton's policy proposals. She basically played catch up to Bernie the whole way through as far as policy development and had flipped on TPP (from gold standard to no support....but why???).
Who can blame him? I blame him, and I blame the people who voted for him.
This analysis overlooks the fact that Trump was clearly an unhinged, unqualified disaster. Every newspaper in the country except one stated in very simple terms that he was unfit for office.
You describe his supporters as broke and depressed. They have no right to wreck the country just because their lives are disappointing.
They don't think Democrats are sufficiently nationalist and patriotic? Seriously? They are the ones who put this nation at risk by voting for a man-child lout with all of the morality and humility of a soap opera pimp.
I am sick of these explanations trying to rationalize people who wanted to destroy our government out of spite.
This analysis overlooks the fact that Trump was clearly an unhinged, unqualified disaster. Every newspaper in the country except one stated in very simple terms that he was unfit for office.
You describe his supporters as broke and depressed. They have no right to wreck the country just because their lives are disappointing.
They don't think Democrats are sufficiently nationalist and patriotic? Seriously? They are the ones who put this nation at risk by voting for a man-child lout with all of the morality and humility of a soap opera pimp.
I am sick of these explanations trying to rationalize people who wanted to destroy our government out of spite.
16
I’m tired of seeing endless analysis of what went wrong and why. The answer is this: Inclusive Capitalism. Capitalism is a great system, but any system that prevents large numbers of people from fully participating or excludes them altogether is destined to fail. The cracks are forming, and we’re seeing them in Britain and the United States. People are getting left behind, and we are blaming them for not getting with the program. Well, the losers have figured out that they are losing and have become enraged. The result: Trump and imminent totalitarianism.
This term, “Inclusive Capitalism,” is not some socialist (oh, horrors!!!) concept. It’s a way of doing business with an eye not toward making maximum bucks and the heck with everybody else, but with an eye toward being in business for many years, employing many people long term in decently paying jobs, and trying to sustain the planet we all live on in the process. It keeps an eye toward maintaining and increasing everyone’s standard of living. In this country, people look at all this tech everyone owns like it’s “improved” us. Well, I recently read an article about a family on food stamps who owned three large screen TV’s. You think that’s an “improvement?”
I encourage our Republican Congress to abandon the Ayn Rand garbage and get on board. It’s the only chance we have. You don’t want Trump, either. Not if you believe in America.
Look it up, people. It’s a real movement.
This term, “Inclusive Capitalism,” is not some socialist (oh, horrors!!!) concept. It’s a way of doing business with an eye not toward making maximum bucks and the heck with everybody else, but with an eye toward being in business for many years, employing many people long term in decently paying jobs, and trying to sustain the planet we all live on in the process. It keeps an eye toward maintaining and increasing everyone’s standard of living. In this country, people look at all this tech everyone owns like it’s “improved” us. Well, I recently read an article about a family on food stamps who owned three large screen TV’s. You think that’s an “improvement?”
I encourage our Republican Congress to abandon the Ayn Rand garbage and get on board. It’s the only chance we have. You don’t want Trump, either. Not if you believe in America.
Look it up, people. It’s a real movement.
6
Why is it that most of the sources quoted in this article appear to assume, subtly, that "real" voters are male and anybody who supports the rights of women is indulging in 1970s identity politics?
Listen boys (and one gal), not all the liberal women who fought for their civil rights in the decades from 1960 to 1980 were "non-materialists" eager to join communes, buy guitars, start up organic farms, and dig clay so they could make awkward mugs in abandoned barns. Many sought to gain rights to their own property, be recognized as citizens entitled to handle credit cards and bank loans without a cosignature from a man, apply for competitive jobs, and enter med and law schools.
And I don't believe that somehow the liberal message is elitist and condescending and ignores American citizens seeking to "survive."
We just need to explain it more powerfully. You like Medicare? So do we. You like health insurance subsided in part by the government? So do we. Would you like to see men like Donald Trump pay their fair of taxes? So would we.
It's all public relations ... and the tide will shift again.
Listen boys (and one gal), not all the liberal women who fought for their civil rights in the decades from 1960 to 1980 were "non-materialists" eager to join communes, buy guitars, start up organic farms, and dig clay so they could make awkward mugs in abandoned barns. Many sought to gain rights to their own property, be recognized as citizens entitled to handle credit cards and bank loans without a cosignature from a man, apply for competitive jobs, and enter med and law schools.
And I don't believe that somehow the liberal message is elitist and condescending and ignores American citizens seeking to "survive."
We just need to explain it more powerfully. You like Medicare? So do we. You like health insurance subsided in part by the government? So do we. Would you like to see men like Donald Trump pay their fair of taxes? So would we.
It's all public relations ... and the tide will shift again.
9
Trump's team flourishes in furnishing fuliginous data. The latest casualty is their amateurish attempt at explaining the recent travel bans. Sean Spicer, with his deadpan expression, did not not obviously bat an eyelid, when he stridently denied accusations about Muslim ban. It almost seems as if Trump's surrogates are perambulating in a hermetically sealed alternate universe, offering ''alternative truths'', quite generously.
NSA's LTG. Michael Flynn quite presumptuously deemed as having been ''put Iran on notice'', without bothering to amplify his statement. Trump's low threshold for fury, his palling around with Putin, and his pronouncements of incomprehensible policy positions are frustrating many an ill-informed citizen.
His foreign policies are another set of ''byzantine political posturings''. His recent telephonic tantrums with Aussie OM Malcolm Turnbull, is absolutely inane. And his pugilistic populism seems to suffer from lack of practicality, but has, apparently, plenty of pomp. There may be more to come.
NSA's LTG. Michael Flynn quite presumptuously deemed as having been ''put Iran on notice'', without bothering to amplify his statement. Trump's low threshold for fury, his palling around with Putin, and his pronouncements of incomprehensible policy positions are frustrating many an ill-informed citizen.
His foreign policies are another set of ''byzantine political posturings''. His recent telephonic tantrums with Aussie OM Malcolm Turnbull, is absolutely inane. And his pugilistic populism seems to suffer from lack of practicality, but has, apparently, plenty of pomp. There may be more to come.
3
Pure and simple - The root cause for Trump's "populist" support is the decline of education in America.
"There is a growing and disturbing trend of anti-intellectual elitism in American culture. It’s the dismissal of science, the arts, and humanities and their replacement by entertainment, self-righteousness, ignorance, and deliberate gullibility."
"We’re creating a world of dummies. Angry dummies who feel they have the right, the authority and the need not only to comment on everything, but to make sure their voice is heard above the rest, and to drag down any opposing views through personal attacks, loud repetition and confrontation."
"There is a growing and disturbing trend of anti-intellectual elitism in American culture. It’s the dismissal of science, the arts, and humanities and their replacement by entertainment, self-righteousness, ignorance, and deliberate gullibility."
"We’re creating a world of dummies. Angry dummies who feel they have the right, the authority and the need not only to comment on everything, but to make sure their voice is heard above the rest, and to drag down any opposing views through personal attacks, loud repetition and confrontation."
16
The "Reagan Revolution" started 36 years ago with "Morning in America", which was primarily a sunrise for whites upset about the civil rights revolution. He let them know he shared their pain. That became a handy smoke screen to cover his heavily anti-blue collar union bashing, social services bashing, liberal bashing, and most effective of all, government (as the source of all problems) bashing.
He never had anything economic to offer to the working class. The right's mantra for the loss of all those factories to China was simple, greedy unions, and it stuck Gaining support of the wealthy and powerful was easy. You can't beat a nice tax cut.
The "Revolution" never ended. In a way Obama's Presidency gave new energy to the smoldering racism that Reagan capitalized on. Muslims and illegals gave further boost. And Trump used that energy to get his electoral college victory.
He never had anything economic to offer to the working class. The right's mantra for the loss of all those factories to China was simple, greedy unions, and it stuck Gaining support of the wealthy and powerful was easy. You can't beat a nice tax cut.
The "Revolution" never ended. In a way Obama's Presidency gave new energy to the smoldering racism that Reagan capitalized on. Muslims and illegals gave further boost. And Trump used that energy to get his electoral college victory.
12
It appears that the underlying argument from all these political analysts is that what they call values, what I would call personal preferences and prejudices, determines political behavior, and rational thought, especially evidence-based rational analysis, has little or nothing to do with political behavior. If that's the case, and it appears it may be, is there any wonder we are careening off on a trajectory that will destroy liberal, democratic institutions?
"If a nation expects to be ignorant & free, in a state of civilisation, it expects what never was & never will be." Thomas Jefferson wrote this in an 1816 letter to Charles Yancey, a state assemblyman, in which he was lobbying for funding for public education. It was true then, and it is true now.
"If a nation expects to be ignorant & free, in a state of civilisation, it expects what never was & never will be." Thomas Jefferson wrote this in an 1816 letter to Charles Yancey, a state assemblyman, in which he was lobbying for funding for public education. It was true then, and it is true now.
8
This is great work by you once again Mr Edsall - but on-the-other hand I can't help thinking "Are you ignorant, in denial or wilfully peddling misinformation" because you've not come close to respecting the fact that the problems and changes you describe are most intense in the US, and where they exist elsewhere in the West are largely due to the example and influence of the US, and indeed are worse where the example of US is most respected and it has the most influence.
In support of my argument I'll point out here that the Economist Intelligence Unit has recently downgraded the US from a "full democracy" to a "flawed democracy" and it now sits at equal 21st on the complete list. In order, here is its top 10: Norway, Iceland, Sweden, New Zealand, Denmark, Canada, Ireland, Switzerland, Finland and Australia. The United Kingdom is 16th.
Moreover it's crazy to suggest that the problems and changes you describe are due to the Left. It is in the US that self-understanding and self-description of Western nations that feature private enterprise as "capitalist" is most intense and insistent, and antipathy towards imagined "socialistic" redistribution, welfare and service provision is most high. It has always been so and - need I say - such is much more associated with the Right. And the US with its Right-wing dominated attitudes and policies caused the GFC and the toxic effects of such spread from the US. The antipathy to the Left of those most affected by such is sadly misplaced.
In support of my argument I'll point out here that the Economist Intelligence Unit has recently downgraded the US from a "full democracy" to a "flawed democracy" and it now sits at equal 21st on the complete list. In order, here is its top 10: Norway, Iceland, Sweden, New Zealand, Denmark, Canada, Ireland, Switzerland, Finland and Australia. The United Kingdom is 16th.
Moreover it's crazy to suggest that the problems and changes you describe are due to the Left. It is in the US that self-understanding and self-description of Western nations that feature private enterprise as "capitalist" is most intense and insistent, and antipathy towards imagined "socialistic" redistribution, welfare and service provision is most high. It has always been so and - need I say - such is much more associated with the Right. And the US with its Right-wing dominated attitudes and policies caused the GFC and the toxic effects of such spread from the US. The antipathy to the Left of those most affected by such is sadly misplaced.
9
Blind patriotism -- my country right-or-wrong nationalism -- reflects a level of immaturity, particularly by those who never bother to read history.
As a child I was proud to be an American -- now as a late-middle-aged expat I'm increasingly embarrassed to be so.
As a child I was proud to be an American -- now as a late-middle-aged expat I'm increasingly embarrassed to be so.
11
Don't be embarrassed that indicates immature personal boundaries. Look for why people are so ignorant and ways to correct it.
I grew up in a small town in the 'reddest state' and am related to a great number of Trump supporters. None of them are dirt poor or unemployed. They are all extreme xenophobes and varying degrees of racist. They are all evangelical Christians and most of them listen to hate radio on a daily basis. None of them have left the country or have a passport. All of them could afford to visit a foreign country if they so desired.
They have no curiosity about the world. I believe they cling to their xenophobia and religion out of a sense of superiority. It really strikes me as defensive but they are ruthless. Education is failing when you can get a college degree without learning much about the world, economics, and politics.
With my family in mind, anytime I read that we have to try to woo these supporters I think there is no way. They live in an alternate world and do not share our values, not by a long shot. The democrats need to work on engagement and galvanizing those who tend not to vote.
They have no curiosity about the world. I believe they cling to their xenophobia and religion out of a sense of superiority. It really strikes me as defensive but they are ruthless. Education is failing when you can get a college degree without learning much about the world, economics, and politics.
With my family in mind, anytime I read that we have to try to woo these supporters I think there is no way. They live in an alternate world and do not share our values, not by a long shot. The democrats need to work on engagement and galvanizing those who tend not to vote.
361
reagan perpetrated a great fraud on us all by convincing many that they were free to follow their own desires regardless of how it affected the world.
I was in the first generation who had most of the worldly classes taken away as I came up but even so the teacher still taught us about how to think and how to regard the rest of the world and the danger of xenophobia etc. I learned this stuff in public and Catholic schools. I doubt very much children are taught any of it now hence adults with minds like a child from a small town who thinks the world is just like his small town and if he finds differently fixing it by making it so is the right thing to do.
I was in the first generation who had most of the worldly classes taken away as I came up but even so the teacher still taught us about how to think and how to regard the rest of the world and the danger of xenophobia etc. I learned this stuff in public and Catholic schools. I doubt very much children are taught any of it now hence adults with minds like a child from a small town who thinks the world is just like his small town and if he finds differently fixing it by making it so is the right thing to do.
Agreed. I live in SC and I'm constantly amazed by Dems who think we can tweak our message to win some of the Gods-n-Guns crowd, if we just focus on our messaging. What they really don't understand is that they HATE us - not individually, perhaps, but as soon as something is identified as liberal/left, they come up with a justification for rejecting it.
I think there is far more success to be had getting disengaged people to see the ways Dem policies would materially improve their lives (if Dems a. adopt policies that would actually do this, and b. STOP APOLOGIZING FOR ACTIVE GOVERNMENT).
Oh, and continuing to point out that Republicans are actively suppressing the vote in a demonstrably partisan and racist way.
I think there is far more success to be had getting disengaged people to see the ways Dem policies would materially improve their lives (if Dems a. adopt policies that would actually do this, and b. STOP APOLOGIZING FOR ACTIVE GOVERNMENT).
Oh, and continuing to point out that Republicans are actively suppressing the vote in a demonstrably partisan and racist way.
7
There is nothing peculiar about Trumps populism.
You see the same in Europe. Last week Whirlpool, the world's largest white good manufacturer, announced that it would close its factory in France (labor cost Euro 38/hr) and move it to Poland (Labor cost Euro 7.80 per hour). Former socialist voters are now voting Le Pen. The Poles, in turn , are upset of having lost their shoe and clothing industry to Ukrainians and North Koreans, moving into Poland and willing to work for less,
Years ago, Paul Krugman "In Praise of Cheap Labor" made the argument that the improvement in the standard of living of people in the Philippines due to outsourcing of American labor is worth more than the loss of in the US.
Failure to understand this of Americans put out of work was "morally outrages". They "hadn't thought things through"
He overlooked that Philippinos can not vote in American elections, but jobless Americans can. It is those arguments that got as Trump
As to the North Koreans, 70% of their pay gets docked by Kim Jong-Un, but the feel they are still better off, so they go.
You see the same in Europe. Last week Whirlpool, the world's largest white good manufacturer, announced that it would close its factory in France (labor cost Euro 38/hr) and move it to Poland (Labor cost Euro 7.80 per hour). Former socialist voters are now voting Le Pen. The Poles, in turn , are upset of having lost their shoe and clothing industry to Ukrainians and North Koreans, moving into Poland and willing to work for less,
Years ago, Paul Krugman "In Praise of Cheap Labor" made the argument that the improvement in the standard of living of people in the Philippines due to outsourcing of American labor is worth more than the loss of in the US.
Failure to understand this of Americans put out of work was "morally outrages". They "hadn't thought things through"
He overlooked that Philippinos can not vote in American elections, but jobless Americans can. It is those arguments that got as Trump
As to the North Koreans, 70% of their pay gets docked by Kim Jong-Un, but the feel they are still better off, so they go.
41
Of course Krugman totally missed it. Surprise, surprise.
In this newspaper, Henry Wallace laid out the dangers of American Fascism in April, 1944.
It explains everything that is happening today. Just like the Extreme Right Wing has insisted we name Radical Islamic Terrorism so as to better fight it, I feel quite strongly that we should label Trumpusm as the Neo Fascism that it is. Not populism. Much more dangerous than that.
http://newdeal.feri.org/wallace/haw23.htm
It explains everything that is happening today. Just like the Extreme Right Wing has insisted we name Radical Islamic Terrorism so as to better fight it, I feel quite strongly that we should label Trumpusm as the Neo Fascism that it is. Not populism. Much more dangerous than that.
http://newdeal.feri.org/wallace/haw23.htm
4
Look at all those brown people in the Trump adoring crowd. In that view is why these people will not notice as much when their health care, Social Security, Medicare and Medicaid disappears - the brown people will be worse off.
Note that the Koch Brothers are one of the right-wing organizations that are creating a media blitz supporting Gorshuch's nomination, one of the most conservative candidates ever (see Linda Greenhouse's essay today). The Koch Brothers with their henchmen and women in the street in this photo here will insure an extremely conservative nation with millions in the street begging and dying in the gutters which will include them, but most brown Americans. Will David Koch be happy then, finally?
One aspect of this that anthropologists and others have been saying for decades is the role of overpopulation. Would all this be happening if the U.S. had a population of say 150 million instead of 380 million? The role of a limited good is one of the major unsaid drivers here. This is where both liberals and conservatives agree - no one has the right to limit the number children I want to have. Add the effects of global warming, and we ain't seen anything yet.
Note that the Koch Brothers are one of the right-wing organizations that are creating a media blitz supporting Gorshuch's nomination, one of the most conservative candidates ever (see Linda Greenhouse's essay today). The Koch Brothers with their henchmen and women in the street in this photo here will insure an extremely conservative nation with millions in the street begging and dying in the gutters which will include them, but most brown Americans. Will David Koch be happy then, finally?
One aspect of this that anthropologists and others have been saying for decades is the role of overpopulation. Would all this be happening if the U.S. had a population of say 150 million instead of 380 million? The role of a limited good is one of the major unsaid drivers here. This is where both liberals and conservatives agree - no one has the right to limit the number children I want to have. Add the effects of global warming, and we ain't seen anything yet.
2
" no one has the right to limit the number children I want to have."
No one wants to, after all we aren't China. But if we are going to control the US population rate to one that is sustainable then the rate of immigration will have to be cut other wise we will join the list of third world nations.
No one wants to, after all we aren't China. But if we are going to control the US population rate to one that is sustainable then the rate of immigration will have to be cut other wise we will join the list of third world nations.
1
There is a major contradiction in this article that I have noticed in other writings on this subject. The right wing voters are responding to identity politics not economic inequality but the left is susposed to "win them back" by abandoning racial and gender equality and focusing on economics.
As a socialist I have never been a fan of identity politics: it caters to stereotypes of marginalized people, many of whom are much more working class than the average Trump supporter. The millenials supporting Bernie Sanders identied more as workers than members of protected classes. This of course hit the Wall Street supporting Democrats in vulnnerable place and led to a frantic and cynical effort to rob Sanders of the nomination.
I suggest focusing on the relatively small number of Trump voters who reside in the northern states and who previopusly voted for Obama or Sanders. These appear to be the only people who actually fit the profile of the economically distressed workers abandoned by the corporate Democrats. The rest are racist sexist deplorables of the alt right and will never be attracted to a leftist agenda.
As a socialist I have never been a fan of identity politics: it caters to stereotypes of marginalized people, many of whom are much more working class than the average Trump supporter. The millenials supporting Bernie Sanders identied more as workers than members of protected classes. This of course hit the Wall Street supporting Democrats in vulnnerable place and led to a frantic and cynical effort to rob Sanders of the nomination.
I suggest focusing on the relatively small number of Trump voters who reside in the northern states and who previopusly voted for Obama or Sanders. These appear to be the only people who actually fit the profile of the economically distressed workers abandoned by the corporate Democrats. The rest are racist sexist deplorables of the alt right and will never be attracted to a leftist agenda.
4
Anyone posited what happens to the world if the USA shrinks from internationalism and the global economy, if we don't put working for the "betterment of humanity in general" at least on equal footing with self-centered concerns? Don't we reap more insecurity when we makes others already less fortunate than we even more insecure about their futures? Is it easier or harder for the so-called Islamic State to recruit when the unemployment rate among young Arab men goes up and their income security goes down? In today's interconnected world, if you care about the well-being of average Americans, you have to care about the well-being of those worse-off than average Americans, no? I fear that, far from keeping America great, Pres. Trump is going to leave office with the tandem of China and Russia wielding the greatest influence in the world.
6
I'm growing tired of "liberals" being blamed for the ills of middle America. It's been many years since the dems or liberals have been in power in those states. These states have been free to enact whatever laws and policies they see fit in order to raise the standard of living for their population.
Yet they haven't. Instead they've focused on regressive economic policies or cultural hot button issues like abortion. Now they are reaping what they sowed and find it a bitter pill to swallow. Someone must be found to blame, and what better targets than immigrants, leftist "elites", and that Kenyan Muslim ex-President who tried to help him, but was stymied at every turn?
Yet they haven't. Instead they've focused on regressive economic policies or cultural hot button issues like abortion. Now they are reaping what they sowed and find it a bitter pill to swallow. Someone must be found to blame, and what better targets than immigrants, leftist "elites", and that Kenyan Muslim ex-President who tried to help him, but was stymied at every turn?
24
WRONG. Trump, Bannon and their legislative supporters are NOT populists. . .they are fascists by definition. Fascists take basic populist promises and add a scape-goat.
Examine the populist campaigns of Obama, Sanders compared to Trump. All appealed to a base with many unrealistic promises that rationally minded voters recognized could not be kept. Trump made equal appeal to his base, but included a scape-goat to focus and increase his base's anger.
It is important, for the future of our Country to precisely describe the Trump administration as fascist. . .a wretched label, but one they have earned and it precise.
Examine the populist campaigns of Obama, Sanders compared to Trump. All appealed to a base with many unrealistic promises that rationally minded voters recognized could not be kept. Trump made equal appeal to his base, but included a scape-goat to focus and increase his base's anger.
It is important, for the future of our Country to precisely describe the Trump administration as fascist. . .a wretched label, but one they have earned and it precise.
3
The giant GPD circle centered on New York City is the Financial Industry, or "the money shufflers" per Warren Buffett.
It is an industry that generates little of real value, fed by the ability of very clever people to get around government regulations, ever increasing.
As Paul Volcker observed:"'The only thing useful banks have invented in 20 years is the ATM"
It is an industry that generates little of real value, fed by the ability of very clever people to get around government regulations, ever increasing.
As Paul Volcker observed:"'The only thing useful banks have invented in 20 years is the ATM"
4
The factors facilitating globalization have evolved exponentially, particularly over the last two centuries, and with each new development there has been an increasing distillation of a high-achiever population, and along with it, a geographic concentration of financial and intellectual capital, as well as social and cultural tolerance. The corollary to this is an expanding, even larger group of Trump’s (and LePen’s, Wilder’s, etc.) “culturally beleaguered and economically threatened constituents — those he calls the forgotten men and women of our country”.
Historically, there have been many revolutions of the proletariat. A big difference today is that the the resources and levers of power of what some call the elite have also been increasingly refined. Trump supporters are bringing a knife to a gun fight. They may win elections, and may one day represent a majority, but they will only be able to hold back the tide of economic and social change in vast but increasingly impoverished enclaves.
Historically, there have been many revolutions of the proletariat. A big difference today is that the the resources and levers of power of what some call the elite have also been increasingly refined. Trump supporters are bringing a knife to a gun fight. They may win elections, and may one day represent a majority, but they will only be able to hold back the tide of economic and social change in vast but increasingly impoverished enclaves.
35
Which makes it even crazier that they voted for an amoral sleazeball commercial real estate developer who has entire rooms painted gold.
2
Why aren't Trump supporters up in arms about his pick to head the Dept. of Labor? Here's a man who is hostile to workers, opposes a higher minimum wage, opposed the new overtime rule for salaried employees, and will reduce regulations regarding the health and safely of workers.
When Trump supporters talk about bringing back the good old days, when everyone had a job and a house and a new car in the garage, what they're forgetting is that the salaries that paid for that prosperity were union salaries. Steel workers, electricians and plumbers, machinists, auto workers, tool and dye makers, construction workers, shipbuilders, even nurses and teachers all used to have the protection of unions.
I grew up in Pittsburgh, and as a child I lived the kind of life that Trump supporters say they want to bring back, except that my childhood was available because my dad was a union steelworker. We had all the stuff that Trump supporters want, but they're forgetting that for the most part, unions made that life possible.
Trump has no intention of allowing unions to take hold again in this country, even though that would help workers achieve their goals of providing a good life. Instead, Trump wants his supporters to work in factories for less than half the wages that were paid in the good old days, and with less health and safely protections. Trump supporters should tell him to pound sand. If they want jobs, they should stop whining and stand together to fight for them.
When Trump supporters talk about bringing back the good old days, when everyone had a job and a house and a new car in the garage, what they're forgetting is that the salaries that paid for that prosperity were union salaries. Steel workers, electricians and plumbers, machinists, auto workers, tool and dye makers, construction workers, shipbuilders, even nurses and teachers all used to have the protection of unions.
I grew up in Pittsburgh, and as a child I lived the kind of life that Trump supporters say they want to bring back, except that my childhood was available because my dad was a union steelworker. We had all the stuff that Trump supporters want, but they're forgetting that for the most part, unions made that life possible.
Trump has no intention of allowing unions to take hold again in this country, even though that would help workers achieve their goals of providing a good life. Instead, Trump wants his supporters to work in factories for less than half the wages that were paid in the good old days, and with less health and safely protections. Trump supporters should tell him to pound sand. If they want jobs, they should stop whining and stand together to fight for them.
244
And Obama did not really support unions either.
I don't know your family, but I've heard interviews with active/former union members who voted for Trump, and the view a lot of them seem to have is that those days are gone - as if by natural forces, rather than legacy workers and newer hires working multi-tiered contracts leading to an erosion of everyone's bargaining power - and they're just trying to eek out what they can. What's missing is any sense of solidarity. I think that "every man for himself" legacy is partly due to Reagan, but it was embraced by Clinton and his confidence in the meritocracy.
Interestingly, Sanders tapped into that feeling of solidarity, and generated enormous enthusiasm from rank-and-file workers. It's a shame that so many union leaders chose to back the "sure thing" early in the primary race, or we might be dealing with a much healthier and optimistic breed of populism right now...
Interestingly, Sanders tapped into that feeling of solidarity, and generated enormous enthusiasm from rank-and-file workers. It's a shame that so many union leaders chose to back the "sure thing" early in the primary race, or we might be dealing with a much healthier and optimistic breed of populism right now...
2
Populism usually involves a political strategy that capitalizes on an almost spontaneous revolt of the poor or those who have somehow been marginalized or alienated in a society.
True "populism" usually associated with the left in this country is not what put Donald Trump into office. Spontaneity appeared late for this new bloc of voters being carefully cultivated by the party. It appeared in the racist response to the election of Barack Obama. It was almost like the reactor being fueled by the party lost its ability to cool itself.
In 1972 the Republican Party platform did not have a single reference to God. By 2012 the party’s platform contains 10 references to God, 19 references to faith and the first reference to a “war on religion.”
This evolution was not by natural selection. It is the result of a concerted strategy by the Republican Party to first divide the country along racial, religious and geographical lines, and then to take advantage of that divisiveness to build a voting block large enough to gain power through whatever means possible. Those means include voter suppression, gerrymandering of voting districts that reflect and protect the divisions, and even attempts to use public education as a propaganda outlet. Rather than emphasize unity within America, how we are different became the focus and this is lethal to a multicultural nation and the government of the people.
Our new President is equivalent to a dangerous, political, "China Syndrome".
True "populism" usually associated with the left in this country is not what put Donald Trump into office. Spontaneity appeared late for this new bloc of voters being carefully cultivated by the party. It appeared in the racist response to the election of Barack Obama. It was almost like the reactor being fueled by the party lost its ability to cool itself.
In 1972 the Republican Party platform did not have a single reference to God. By 2012 the party’s platform contains 10 references to God, 19 references to faith and the first reference to a “war on religion.”
This evolution was not by natural selection. It is the result of a concerted strategy by the Republican Party to first divide the country along racial, religious and geographical lines, and then to take advantage of that divisiveness to build a voting block large enough to gain power through whatever means possible. Those means include voter suppression, gerrymandering of voting districts that reflect and protect the divisions, and even attempts to use public education as a propaganda outlet. Rather than emphasize unity within America, how we are different became the focus and this is lethal to a multicultural nation and the government of the people.
Our new President is equivalent to a dangerous, political, "China Syndrome".
5
There was an article in the Guardian that showed most Trump supporters were making $70K+ per year. Now I know some real dummies who make good money. Trump and W being two, but the facts are that most people at that level of income are at least of average intelligence. Hardly the sorts one appeals to when trying to be populist. Populists appeal to the average worker who is just as intelligent and often much brighter than those previously mentioned, but of a lower economic class. By example most of the great Greeks we know of were actually working men who used that math and the theories they developed in daily life. This is why owners seek to automate and simplify as much as the money it saves it removes a knowledge base from the populace that assists workers in getting smarter and seeing the world rationally and by that seeing what is and is not fair.
No I think this idea of Trump being populist is more of the propaganda machine misinformation that helps steer folks to miss the left turn at Albuquerque they should be taking based on what has gone before.
No I think this idea of Trump being populist is more of the propaganda machine misinformation that helps steer folks to miss the left turn at Albuquerque they should be taking based on what has gone before.
It's really not that complicated. After 8 years of Obama swinging this country to the left, the pendulum is swinging back, rather abruptly. The Heartland is tired of political correctness, OW, BLM, targeting of police, etc. They gave the Obama doctrine a chance and it proved to be a failure.
2
Stop using the term populism. This is the Oligarchy tightening it's grip because capitalism can no longer adapt. They have no solutions, so they are resorting to the only thing they understand, it's called oppression.
6
It is playing to public delusions. And it is completely counterproductive to winning consent of the governed by competence and fairness.
1
Excellent article, highlighting all the complexity. Those Trump voters who expect him to address their economic grievances will be betrayed. Trump is harnessing and using his populist appeal to further his own agenda, which is nothing more than making government a servant of corporate business enterprises. He doesn't really care at all for the despairing rural Whites who voted for him. He'll happily take away their health care, remove protections for their drinking water, do nothing to prevent them losing their homes, and make a middle-class lifestyle impossible for them. Bernie Sanders would really have helped these people; but the Democrats didn't give him a chance. Remember that he repeatedly urged the Democrats to have a 50-state strategy! He wanted to get a chance to talk with the people who ended up voting for Trump. Corporate America and the 1% are solidly behind Trump now, because they see him furthering their interests. They know now that his populism was just a rick to get elected. Only on restricting immigration will Trump do something the White working class voters wanted. Nothing else for them!
3
There really is no help for people who fool themselves about the intentions of casino moguls.
3
I understand the Trump voter's motivations but how do we make them realize that they are wrong? Almost all of their policy proposals will make the economic situation worse. There comes a time when you just have to blame the people (for ignorance, lack of action, etc.) and they're going to have to take what comes to them, the disastrous consequences of a Trump presidency. They may accept the personal freedom/social consequences but they won't like the economic consequences. I think that this US has become too ignorant to govern rationally.
2
There is only one kind of businessperson who likes unpredictability: profiteers.
1
This is why Putin and the strongmen before him ran Russia. Easily invaded, with no natural borders such as mountains or seas to protect them - Russia has been an "easy" country to invade. The tradeoff is security and centralized control in exchange for personal freedom. By making "the wall" and "immigrants" central to his rallies - Trump rose in Republican polls, won the nomination and kept to a narrow xenophobic message, easily understood and digested. Jobs & Security & a Wall. Hillary went with ads displaying his boorish behavior. She ran a poor campaign for people looking for help in this uncertain world. Great article - should be required reading for anyone interested in how Trump won.
All economic programs have winners and losers. Global free trade has been very good for the upper middle class, elites, and the poor. It has damaged the working middle class significantly in modern societies. Free trade is a major factor in the wealth gap with the rich getting richer, the poor getting cheaper goods and more benefits, and working middle class falling back. With a growing society, and jobs plentiful, immigrants are not competition and are welcome. As the working middle class is being forced into part time jobs with less benefits, illegal immigrants do become competition. Is it bigotry when your living standards are actually declining because of the competition? I think not, it is natural self interest. Lastly there is a significant difference between immigrants and illegal immigrants. We should take the rule of law seriously. If one stops taking immigration law seriously, how far behind is the Bill of Rights?
Lots of analyses, but what matters is surely resistance to the immoral, bullying, exploitative use of power? Economic, cultural, nationalistic resentment matters in all countries and societies to varying degrees. Some politicians and movements exploit them for their own power. A billionaire who incites hatred and preys on insecurity will do well by outflanking political and social norms because he has no empathy for victims. America's history as a nation of immigrants makes it an incongruous addition to the cult of blood and soil of 19th century Europe. The earlier story was tragic for the world. Let us hope saner, more tolerant Americans prevail.
2
How does a writer like Edsall harmonize the Reuters poll that 49% of Americans support the Trump's executive order while at the same time Trump's popularity is sinking like a stone. Yes, I know these are two different questions but at some points the answers demand more contemplation.
1
The notion that Donald Trump is a populist because Steve Bannon tells him he is can only be characterized as horse-puckies. Trump is a con artist. If 80 percent of the manufacturing jobs disappearing over the past decades went away because of automation, not off-shoring, how will they reappear? Will the Republicans promote laws banning factory automation? Fostering the "trade deals are a disaster/linecutters screw you" rhetoric is smart politics but hardly correct. The real screwing has been the class warfare transferring over a trillion dollars annually from the middle class to the top 10 percent. We have lost the equivalent of 16 million jobs paying $60,000 a year through redistribution upward. That far outstrips transfer abroad but does not fit the Trump narrative. Nor did it fit the Democratic narrative.....how would Hillary Clinton collect speaking fees from Goldman Sachs while identifying its executives as the mortal enemy of the middle class? The Clintons represent the corporate wing of the party, those avidly avoiding discussion of the class warfare waged so aggressively against the middle class since Reagan. Trump is no populist; his Cabinet picks demonstrate that but he is happy to don the populist mantle if it promotes his con. He will promote aggressively policies and postures that suit his interests as these are highly personal. In the end he will be the architect of, not the cure for, "American carnage" but retired to Florida with Secret Service protection.
2
Everything Trump does is just throwing sand in people's faces as he cheats them.
2
The culture wars theory is interesting but I think it far more likely that Donald Trump is president because the voters woke up to the fact that there was almost no one left in DC who hadn't been corrupted by the bribes and payoffs otherwise known as "campaign contributions," and that if they wanted THEIR interests served not Wall Street's they would do well to elect a DC outsider. But HaHa! The joke's on them. The new Trump team turned out to be a reunion of Goldman Sachs alumni. Oops!
9
Trump just disintermediated the politicians.
1
Start with what Edsall is selling us: Wilkinson’s bleak prediction depends heavily on the success or failure of President Trump’s attempts to undermine the pillars of democratic government: the system of checks and balances, the rule of law and the watchdog role of the media.
Can Trump deliver on his promises to millions of culturally beleaguered and economically threatened constituents — those he calls “the forgotten men and women of our country”?
Trump’s “authoritarian xenophobic” rampage has taken him to the White House
With this the conclusion in plain view then unpack the his domestic and world view supported by such unreliable items like Denmark and exit polls.
The simple truth is more likely that the 2016 Election exposed the corrupt thinking and action of the Democratic Party. Given a choice the wisdom at the ballot box was President Trump. This is another attempt to reduce the voters judgement.
Can Trump deliver on his promises to millions of culturally beleaguered and economically threatened constituents — those he calls “the forgotten men and women of our country”?
Trump’s “authoritarian xenophobic” rampage has taken him to the White House
With this the conclusion in plain view then unpack the his domestic and world view supported by such unreliable items like Denmark and exit polls.
The simple truth is more likely that the 2016 Election exposed the corrupt thinking and action of the Democratic Party. Given a choice the wisdom at the ballot box was President Trump. This is another attempt to reduce the voters judgement.
Trump sure has discredited the Electoral College mirage of elections.
But who will do anything about that?
But who will do anything about that?
2
Naturally, every Oklahoma county went for Trump. The GOP has been in control of our legislature and all state-wide offices for many years now. Yet the state is at the bottom of many indicators such as wealth accumulation, health outcomes and education attainment. Republican doctrine is literally preached from the pulpit here. The message of God, guns, fear of gays and people of color and hate of abortion are seemingly more powerful than anything else. Possibly folks will have to be living in tents and standing under a cold rain in line for soup before right wing ideas change.
6
The argument here sounds authentic, but this still an introspective argument within a shrinking world of the western population. The world outside of the US and the EU, mostly composed by countries like China, Japan, India, Brazil or South Korea, expanding faster in the economic scale or in the population, and this is the main cause of the headache of the so-called uneducated or poor whites. This is the historical realty that even Trump cannot change. The elites in the west are pragmatic and can utilize their capital freely anywhere in the world, but working class people cannot move as flexible as capital. Therefore they become anti-elites and xenophobic to some extent. Can you blame them?
I don't get the schizophrenia about population growth. If we see we are diluting the value of every person by operating on the assumption that too many are never enough, why is there such entrenched opposition to free contraception and abortion on demand?
Why do we not see that all tribes are paranoid about losing the tribal competition for hegemony by population growth?
Why do we not see that all tribes are paranoid about losing the tribal competition for hegemony by population growth?
2
Oh, and to the killing I'm going to get by suggesting we find some sympathetic young attractive white guy to help us win, I add to the insult by asking he look like he might have played football. Gee...I'm desperate!
2
This article is lost in the weeds. Our attitudes are secondary. What is most important is that we get Trumps tax returns. Understanding who he is beholding to is crucial toward understanding his motives.
3
So- what is new here? Seriously?
1
Thank you for writing this. The graphics are excellent. I have read it twice. I will read it again. But alas, I still don't understand how it happened. I don't. I do, but I don't. I guess I can't accept that it happened. But it did. We all jumped into the fire.
1
Trump thinks he is Sully in the plane and America is the plane hitting the bird strike. He is going to save everyone in the plane by ditching it on the Hudson. But the problem is that Sully has been flying for over 40 years and is calm and highly competent. Trump had been flying a 4 seat Cessna for his past 40 years and doesn't even know where the heck the airports are in the area. This is his first time in an Airbus plane. For those who voted for him, they are the passengers on that plane now. Do you think you will see the scene at the end of the movie that all will be accounted for? Go figure.
1
Maybe, but the county where I live went for Trump 70 percent so, like it or not, I know Trump supporters. I talk with them, and I see the signs in their yards. They live down the street and utter all sorts of absurdities. Avoiding them isn't an option. Almost no Trump supporter that I know is unemployed or has been unemployed any time that I can remember. The guy down the street builds houses and owns two houses himself, one here and one in a resort area. along with multiple rental properties. He owns multiple vehicles (at least two per family member). A new Trump-supporting couple who moved in recently have multiple vehicles too, all sporting the yellow "Don't Tread on Me" license plates with gun-enthusiast personalized IDs like 9MM CHK. The Trump-supporting Libertarian husband of a friend has a six-figure income. Another couple, retired military, are exceptionally prosperous. The only Trump supporter I know who is unemployed is a serious alcoholic who has hurt his body so much he can no longer work. I'll try to get out more and find these populists who are unemployed through no fault of their own.
In Academia its publish or perish. And coining new buzz words keeps everyone on their toes. But one brush for all the US and Western Europe is probably a bit too broad.
I know California, and Big Business' importation of cheap labor across the pay scale from Bracero 'guest workers' to H1b visas can't help but have an impact on society as a whole. So now Trump wants a wall? En serio? Our next Governor will probably be Hispanic!
All along, Big Business and Big Ag will have their way (Olmsted's 'Right Out of California') even if its both ways. They will have their tunnels, Jerry will build them, and the rest of us will pay and pay and pay …
I know California, and Big Business' importation of cheap labor across the pay scale from Bracero 'guest workers' to H1b visas can't help but have an impact on society as a whole. So now Trump wants a wall? En serio? Our next Governor will probably be Hispanic!
All along, Big Business and Big Ag will have their way (Olmsted's 'Right Out of California') even if its both ways. They will have their tunnels, Jerry will build them, and the rest of us will pay and pay and pay …
3
good reading!
The one Democrat who could have blunted this authoritarian insurgency and all it portends is Bernie Sanders. Thanks so much, Billary.
The photo at the beginning says all that needs to be said. A sea of white faces.
4
No matter how you slice it, Trump came from nowhere to win. He is the Rocky of American Politics. In the last half century, Democrats have gone from being the lunch bucket Party to the party of minority group grievances. The only way back for the Democrats - excepting some monumental Bush like mistake ergo Iraq and Wall Street home mortgage malfeasance - the Democrats need to put the grievance thing on the back burner and focus on the economy and jobs like a laser. Obama blew it. He was elected in no small part because white Americans believed he represented their success in bringing an historically abused minority into the mainstream. Then he ended up moralizing to them that they hadn't done enough and it was still all their fault. Trump is a dose of awful tasting medicine for Democrats but they have to swallow it along with their wounded, outraged pride before they can get well and sell a majority of Americans on something that makes common sense to them. Transgender bathroom use and group identity think isn't going to cut it.
58
Neither, though, is group (religious, ethnic, gender) approbation.
I get where you're coming from, but honestly don't think we need to not pay attention to legitimate grievances, so much as address those *and* the economic/cultural insecurity issues.
If the Dems can run a candidate with a genuine and credible message of hopeful inclusive economic populism in 2020, it won't matter if they also support transgender bathrooms. Out-of-work laborers who swung from D to R this time around will vote for someone in a studded leather tutu if they think it'll put a nice fat paycheck back in their pocket every week.
If the Dems can run a candidate with a genuine and credible message of hopeful inclusive economic populism in 2020, it won't matter if they also support transgender bathrooms. Out-of-work laborers who swung from D to R this time around will vote for someone in a studded leather tutu if they think it'll put a nice fat paycheck back in their pocket every week.
The author's comment, "The Left--as it currently exists with its toxic obsession with ... identity politics for everyone except the majority who might form its base--will simply die if it doesn't understand this," is exactly right. Liberals can't understand (or simply won't acknowledge) how divisive their cultural policies has become. The double standard, affirmative action, white privilege, cultural appropriation, racism, safe places and shame and blame rhetoric (many examples of which are found in the NYTs) have succeeded in alienating many, many white Americans who otherwise may have been sympathetic. The Left is more responsible for the election of an ignorant bigot to the White House than all the working class whites whom they have demonized.
56
Luckily, the majority of the future generation won't be white. (Well, unless the gets their lebensborn program up and running soon.
1
"While much of the elite 'with cosmopolitan sympathies see their main ethical imperative as working for the betterment of humanity in general,' ... Wow! The cleaning lady in our mess hall has sold out all the tickets to Planet Hypocrisy, and is now a cosmopolitan and regrets for not keeping a ticket for herself.
One problem I have Edsall's commentary is how he excepts the meme that Blacks and Hispanics are not part of the overall working class. Most Blacks and Hispanics in the working class are also "culturally conservative" if that is defined as being religious and uncomfortable with social equality for LGBT people and reproductive rights for women. Yet they still vote Democratic and in alliance with LGBT and urban elites. I would argue that the Democrats lost the white southern working class (and that includes northern ethnics with Southern attitudes on race), when it turned its back on White Supremacy in 1964. In the "lines" in these people's heads, blacks and Hispanics should always be behind them and giving them equality is allowing them to "cut" in front. Like Senator Sessions, they may be "hurt" by being called racist, but when you waddle and quack like a duck, you are likely a duck. I do think the white working class in the north that is not particularly race conscious or religious voted for Trump in this election because those issues, but in spite of it. Hillary Clinton was associated with "NAFTA" and her husband's administration and fair or accurate or not, NAFTA is associated with the closing of factories in small towns and cities across the Midwest. Further, the Obama's administration of TPP as its major political, a priority of the economic elite and the foreign policy elite, reinforced perception of indifference to working class incomes.
2
But were left redistributive policies before the shift to post-materialism aimed at propping up relatively well-off socioeconomic classes, the ones that feel a relative increase in economic insecurity and now vote populist right? Kind of in practical terms, but it certainly isn’t the explicit objective of the left to maintain the lead of white working, middle and upper-middle classes over outgroups indefinitely, to keep them feeling good based on some anchoring effect/behavioral econ phenomenon. …One of the bigger ideas here, that post-materialism overshadowed the left’s materialistic agenda, seems intuitively unobjectionable: both the left and the right oversaw a vast widening in wealth inequality over the last fifty years or so (apparently a reversion from the unusual tightening that resulted from the Great Depression and World War II), and elites in general didn’t seem terribly aware of the trend until recently, perhaps in part because it took a long time to document it so convincingly. Nevertheless, the left continued throughout with policies that curb inequality (on taxes, an at least a vague support for labor unions, etc.), and Obama in particular bent the curve, notably with ACA, taxes and financial regulation. Maybe not sharply enough (faced with very effective Republican obstruction). But if the problem is that such policies don’t disproportionately advantage disaffected whites, well the left/center left are indeed in a bind, and so is the rest of Western civ.
1
While this article brings up many good points about our "changing" political landscape, the authors - and virtually every analysis I've seen elsewhere - fail to recognize a large counter point. Hillary Clinton won the popular vote and were it not for our archaic Electoral College that gives more weight to these "disaffected" areas of our country, she would be president. In addition, while the Democrats did not take back the House or Senate, they did make gains. So all in all, MORE people voted FOR the "liberal" ideas. If not for the Electoral College and gerrymandering, the analysis would be about the declining clout of the uneducated white voter.
3
This is part of the regular 8 year cycle of swinging back and forth in American politics. But, unfortunately for the left, the last six years saw little legislation which is in place and impervious. Instead there are executive orders-which can be disordered, to chagrin and dismay.
Just from the title, I would say it is ignorance. The Founding Fathers believed that our form of democracy required the populace to be well educated. And, since it wasn't at the time of the birth of the nation senators were chosen by state legislatures. But, even the well educated can be compromised by ideology. Someone said, Man strives to be logical but in the end he is a creature of emotion.
1
Missing from this analysis is that Democrats tried to address bread and butter issues for the last eight years, but Republicans denied Obama the bi-partisanship he promised, and blocked his every effort. Raising the minimum wage in the heartland would have helped a great deal because Walmart and Taco Bell are the only places to work. Expanding Medicaid in red states would have helped with health, and the ACA could have been made more affordable, but Republicans wasted eight years of our lives railing against it. A jobs program would have helped but Republicans blocked that, too. Republicans refused even to reduce the interest on student debt. The left is being scapegoated for the cynical and deliberate obstruction of Republicans who have abandoned the working class and instead is distracting them with faked and dangerous outrage against Muslims, Mexicans, Iranians, Australians ... Articles like these only feed the rightwing narrative that grossly mischaracterizes Democratic values, when in fact the election of Democrats on bread and butter issues would be a godsend.
8
Ms. Jones, it seems we had the same thoughts at the same time. You articulated what I was thinking. I believe a significant number of Trump supporters who supported President Obama did so because of the failure of Obama call the Republicans out on their obstruction and instead quietly work around them to the limited extent possible. And the failure of Clinton to adequately acknowledge the plight of the White working class and place the blame appropriately on Republican obstructionism. Sometimes it's better to lose a principled great war than to achieve a small victory.
Assuming that much of your analysis is correct, what do we do to reverse this tumble into the abyss? Eliminating Trump alone will not solve the problem. We must expose and address the root issues that permit Trump and those of his ilk to exploit.
We need some Republican members of Congress to leave the dark side. Seriously, they've sat idly by while the tea party and Fox News took over and hijacked their party. Why? Because those entities supported the Republican agenda of minimizing government. The tea party and Fox News got them votes. They thought once they had control of the Legislative and Executive branches they could move forward aggressively with their pro-business agenda, which is really what they want.
But Trump is not good for American values and they can see that. They need for once, to stop obstructing and sit down with Democrats and figure this mess out.
Long term? I've begun mentioning this movement toward "Inclusive Capitalism." No, it's not some hippy thing. Real CEO's of multi-national companies have begun to understand that the money-grab attitude of capitalism, namely, "winner take all," is likely to destroy us.
I think our business leaders and our business schools are going to have to embrace a new sort of capitalism going forward, one where the winner doesn't take all. It's just not working out.
But Trump is not good for American values and they can see that. They need for once, to stop obstructing and sit down with Democrats and figure this mess out.
Long term? I've begun mentioning this movement toward "Inclusive Capitalism." No, it's not some hippy thing. Real CEO's of multi-national companies have begun to understand that the money-grab attitude of capitalism, namely, "winner take all," is likely to destroy us.
I think our business leaders and our business schools are going to have to embrace a new sort of capitalism going forward, one where the winner doesn't take all. It's just not working out.
2
The Dems are stuck between the poles of the working class , on one side, and Wall Street on the other . To win in 2020 they need to lighten up on their corporatist neo-liberal agenda otherwise it will be Trump 24/7. Can the millionaire dem politicians do it?
1
Economic survival has in the past been the impetus for immigration from Europe to Ellis Island, and relocation from farms to the cities in very large numbers over the course of well over a century. These disruptions have been accepted as the inevitable. Whereas those involved have suffered through very difficult change, the economic and social order has progressed. When WiIl Wilkinson finds that "material precariousness leads to cultural retreat" in the form of "support of a populist leader with disturbingly illiberal tendencies", I don't doubt it. But I wonder why our parents, and grandparents opted rather to be proactive on their own behalf rather than seek a reactionary backward seeking mirage.
3
What is on display is an outcome of citizens led by emotional reasoning. It is a display of public education's failure to turn out individuals who are grounded in civic education, and who form an informed, active, and civil citizenry; rather than rowdy participants in a reality show promising them a cash reward and prizes.
2
In short: the problem "the free world" faces right now is that its "leader" is its outlier and not its exemplar. It is its leader only because of its size and its fertility. If not for such it probably wouldn't even be a member. Americans need to wake up and accept this. You've been drifting towards plutocracy and theocracy for nearly four decades. A Sanders presidency would have begun the turn of the tide back to creating a US that isn't the "sick man" of the West.
1
I wish all the Trump supporters pictured could see the economic map shown here. They probably wouldn't believe it though, and would come up with some alternative facts.
1
Sorry Tom but the rise of hate by the American white working stiff is due to the gilded age, that has produced an immoral distribution of wealth by taking it from these working stiffs and concentrating it in the 1%. The wealthy control the media and the education system and teach these working stiffs that the wealthy are not to blame, the culprit is the "others". The wealthy wrap their capitalist system in the flag and teach that their system is the holy grail that the working stiffs seek. If these working stiffs ever see that the King has no clothes on, things will change.
3
To put it more succinctly, there are millions of people who have nothing left of any value but their whiteness and they voted accordingly. It will cause hardship for the rest of us, familiar hardship, but hardship nonetheless. It is killing them.
3
The underlying cause of populism and xenophobia is economic. People who can't find good jobs in their own communities become frightened and resentful of anyone who is doing better, with a special resentment reserved for immigrants. The democrats should have understood that but after decades of tone-deaf compromises (NAFTA, TPP, etc.) to appease the GOP and its corporate clients, the democrats lost their natural support among the non-wealthy working class. It's tragic really, especially because those angry, forgotten voters turned to a republican opportunist and his party for a remedy. Out of anger and, sadly, good dose of ignorance, they've voted for their enemy and against their own interests. How much longer before the democratic party remembers who it represents and learns to communicate with its natural constituency?
2
It is very hard to avoid concluding that this obnoxious husk of a human being actually does represent the attitudes and approaches to life of his supporters.
3
President Nightmare rides on.
1
I can't help but notice: Now that the disenfranchised, "forgotten Americans" who are struggling with drug addiction and shortened lifespans are white, we are bending over backwards to remember them. Perhaps that is largely because their votes are not suppressed? That their votes are, in fact, amplified by the electoral system? Now the talk is all about government bringing their jobs back. Republicans seem to have silenced their "personal responsibility" choir, that used to be so loud when the disenfranchised groups included fewer whites.
2
"Populism" has become, like "racism", "misogynism", "islamophobia", "nationalism" and a few other expression, a derogatory code word to indicate that someone has opinions that the left does not like. This kind of game was perfected by the USSR.
Trump is playing the fear and xenophobia cards with his base. He or Bannon are cunning enough to know that many people- middle-age and older white males in particular- are frightened by all of the changes of the last 30-40 years or so. They are in many cases deeply concerned about keeping their heads above water economically. They are disturbed by the new pecking order in society,e.g., women, African -Americans, "foreigners" are getting thee jobs that were exclusively theirs at one point. Jobs are going across the seas.
Trump, the celebrity millionaire, and Bannon a slovenly Leninist, are Elmer Gantrys on steroids selling snake oil to people wishing to return to the world . of yesterday. What the Trump base fails to see is that Trump, to qoute Jonathan Rauch, is "an opportunist whose only ideological commitment is to himself." And Bannon who hides in the shadows is an ideological nightmare out to destroy government.
Trump, the celebrity millionaire, and Bannon a slovenly Leninist, are Elmer Gantrys on steroids selling snake oil to people wishing to return to the world . of yesterday. What the Trump base fails to see is that Trump, to qoute Jonathan Rauch, is "an opportunist whose only ideological commitment is to himself." And Bannon who hides in the shadows is an ideological nightmare out to destroy government.
1
The quote from the Economist suggests that many who supported Trump are characterized by undesirable health-related items: “lower life expectancy, higher rates of obesity, diabetes, heavy drinking and lower levels of regular physical activity.” Along with lowered economic opportunities, these would be the people who will look to the ACA, Medicare, and Medicaid. It seems to tie together with willful self-destructive behavior. This leads to the quote from Dr. Monnat: that “Trump performed better than Romney in counties with higher drug, alcohol and suicide mortality rates.” These trends clearly work against their best interests but Trump's promises claim the opposite and get their votes.
1
If this is all true, which I believe it is, then how does any party reach the majority of the American populace? Former President Obama had the best success by appealing to the "angels of our better natures", on cultural issues, especially as they relate to children. Few adults would advocate for policies that hinder ANY child from gaining a fair chance to succeed, unless it is their child versus children of the world (as President Trump seems to be pitting 'us versus them' mentality). Former President Obama and administration did all that they could to boost our American economy, education, healthcare, voting rights, etc., to allow us to get beyond 'bread and butter issues' and see beyond ourselves to support the world, as he rightly said, "the world's stability makes for our stability". President Trump is pursuing policies that will have the opposite effects of depressing our economy and destabilizing the world, thus America in the process. The only ones who win in his system will be the oligarchs, like himself, who gain more wealth to do, generally, for themselves (apologies to Bill Gates, Clinton Foundation, etc. etc.) and those who are ready for the world to end real soon! Since most of us are neither, and President Trump doesn't seem to be able to work with anyone - family, advisors, party, business associates, diplomats, other country authorities (except Putin), then I have to believe his "peculiar populism" won't end well. Let's curb the collateral damage.
2
No apologies to the Clinton Foundation needed.
Sexism, racism and unrepentant Republican identification were the primary reasons behind Trump's electoral college win, despite the conclusions of these studies. There was a highly unrepresentative result to the election. Clinton won the vote of the people by about three million votes. 54% of those voting did not vote for Trump. And the approximately half of eligible voters who didn't show up to the polls at all were more likely to vote for Clinton, if studies were to be done on this cohort, and I hope they will be.
2
So Trump voters suffer from corporate decision making that offshores and automates jobs. So they vote for a corporate titan, and his cronies. Income inequality and decreased social mobility are growing and endemic -- perceived as the fault of "line-cutters" rather than 30 years of discredited "trickle-down" tax cuts for the rich, brought to you by the Republican Party. So they vote Republican. Trump voters are sick, in body and spirit, so they vote for repeal of affordable health care, and for deregulation that will bring us dirty air and water.
This makes no sense, unless viewed as the consequence of unrelenting, deliberate, manipulative, misrepresentation of policy consequences, fueled by scape-goating, and racism. Greed and hate are powerful partners, and they won't lead us to the promised land, and no more will the authoritarian Trump.
This makes no sense, unless viewed as the consequence of unrelenting, deliberate, manipulative, misrepresentation of policy consequences, fueled by scape-goating, and racism. Greed and hate are powerful partners, and they won't lead us to the promised land, and no more will the authoritarian Trump.
4
The repubs have been reducing taxes at the federal and state levels for the elites since Reagan. This is evident in the flat mean income for the last 40 years while incomes for the 1 percent have increased substantially. The 0.1 percent's wealth increased from about 8% in 1977 to about 23% in 2014. The repubs fought efforts to stimulate the economy after the 2008 financial crisis that resulted in one of the longest post-recession employment recoveries, 74 months, in US history. The dems did seem to lose the common-people emphasis over the last 40 years with exceptions. Obama made some improvements but not fully appreciated. The repubs demonized unions and government employees to pit one middle class group against the other. The European response to the financial crisis was austerity and the US had its own version of austerity after 2010. The austerity policies in the US and Europe upped economic hardship for middle income people, upped left-out feelings, and added to the rise of nationalism. The repubs used gay marriage, civil rights, feminism, the debt, and gun rights to distract middle America while repubs moved wealth from the middle class to elites. If the mean income had kept pace with the upper quartile in the last 40 yrs, it would be about $77K now. If middle Americans were earning those wages, I suspect there would much less interest in nationalism. Bernie Sanders and Elizabeth Warren appeal across many social/economic lines, the dems need to follow their example.
2
Articles like these concern me because more people voted for Trump's opponent than voted for him. The electoral college is why he won.
2
Trump's "populism" is no populism at all -- rather, a scam to con the relatively gullible to vote for him. He has absolutely no interest in the poor folks whom he duped into voting for him but every interest into lining his already overstuffed pockets.
Trump won because those "left behind" related to the comic book simplicity of his messaging. He plays the role of super-hero to his base. Progressives don't have a super-hero, but they do have the streets.
1
Great analysis and WAY overdue....
Mainstream media changes do reflect these "postmaterialist" cultural trends, but this huge, multifaceted establishment also DRIVES them, in the first place. The connectivity provided by internet has further catalyzed these cultural changes to the point of hegemony, in fact. It some ways, the rejection of these cultural changes represents resistance to this institutional authority and its propaganda. The double-irony of mainstream journalism using their authority to influence (rather than objectively report to) the American people in seeing Trump as an unhinged, self-driven authoritarian, rather than as an anti-establishment populist, is not lost on the vast numbers of under-privileged and under-represented working class Americans that voted for him.
Mainstream media changes do reflect these "postmaterialist" cultural trends, but this huge, multifaceted establishment also DRIVES them, in the first place. The connectivity provided by internet has further catalyzed these cultural changes to the point of hegemony, in fact. It some ways, the rejection of these cultural changes represents resistance to this institutional authority and its propaganda. The double-irony of mainstream journalism using their authority to influence (rather than objectively report to) the American people in seeing Trump as an unhinged, self-driven authoritarian, rather than as an anti-establishment populist, is not lost on the vast numbers of under-privileged and under-represented working class Americans that voted for him.
Trump may be flamboyant, but he is our liar-in-chief, hence, eroding a minimum of trust in democratic institutions, and leading to an autocratic government intent in hiding its own inadequacy by finding scapegoats...and making xenophobia a virtue, instead of a divisive losing strategy in an immigrant's country. Developing a society based on reason, tolerance and inclusion does not have to be contrary to our 'feelings' of belonging, and contributing to the richness of our diversity.
1
Is the explanation for Trump's popularity that simple? It sometimes appears that those who rise into status quo positions of power in our society look at the system as a way to win the Lottery. Once in power they stoke the social divisions in our culture as a divide and conquer strategy to keep the people at bay by keeping them in each others faces so they don't see the nation's wealth is not distributed fairly. Why else would Washington allow the destabilization of our culture by allowing the flooding of our society with so many guns, just like they destabilize other societies overseas by arming factions in those countries? We are as violent a country in peacetime as some of the developing nations abroad we try to destabilize. Is it in the interest of those in Washington to have a united society that's wide awake and aware of what Washington is up to? Or does it benefit Washington to perpetuate and exacerbate social divisions across the country in a bi-polar way to keep the country preoccupied with partisan bickering?
2
One of the ironies of the election is that Trump voters included both the one-precent and the lower working/middle class. The horror of that irony is the degree to which Trump willingly exploited the latter for the benefit of the former.
4
What I find gulling about the middle and working classes is that they would have been far better off marching on Washington in a great show of force over the last eight years. This would make a statement that would drive a movement and better their situation. But no, they voted for Trump instead out of frustration and because they were too lazy to get off their couches. And they barely showed up for his Inauguration. How much sympathy does the middle and working classes deserve?
The longterm effects of the bank bailouts and the housing crisis are never discussed as being inter- related.
Bernie and Elizabeth Warren talked about the privileged 1% but it was too abstract for the voter to connect lack of jobs to the upside down economy.
Trump garnered the vote because he brought the message of suffering home by making it about jobs, something everyone can relate to.
Bernie and Elizabeth Warren talked about the privileged 1% but it was too abstract for the voter to connect lack of jobs to the upside down economy.
Trump garnered the vote because he brought the message of suffering home by making it about jobs, something everyone can relate to.
1
Please stop calling Donald Trump's pathology by a political term. Mental Illness isn't a Political position.
2
Informative, very much so, but I object to calling the Trump phenomenon "populism." The overwhelming presence of mass media has largely created a society in which social contagion is a primary form of connectedness between individuals. Statistical analysis cannot capture social contagion, nor provide an adequate understanding of its role in elections. Trump's "celebrity" status should not be understated nor underestimated with respect to its role in his election. He was a celebrity known to be a bully who fired people and the US Congress was a group of people in need of being fired. That this seems as reasonable as it did to so many people is not a rational assessment by individuals of their economic needs or life prospects, but an emotional response to what they saw going on in Washington as conveyed through the media. Yes, there is populism afoot, but Trump's election cannot be adequately explained without recognizing the role of social contagion.
3
Trump created his main talking points by listening to right wing radio and, with Bannon's help, distilling it to Tweetable sound bites. His base loves that red meat! Immigration is one of those hot button issues but Progressives delude themselves if they think only the far right has concerns which explains why 49% of Americans are OK with the Muslim ban. When people become economically insecure they become more clannish and distrustful of "the other". Mr. Trump speaks to people's fears and many have responded by turning over their power to him completely.
The Democratic Party must come up with an economic plan incorporating European Socialist policies popularized by Bernie Sanders that will lift all boats and explain it in way that all Americans can understand. If more services such as healthcare and childcare are made affordable through higher taxes on the wealthy, the inequality and hopelessness that many Americans feel with dissipate along with their support of this autocrat opportunist.
The Democratic Party must come up with an economic plan incorporating European Socialist policies popularized by Bernie Sanders that will lift all boats and explain it in way that all Americans can understand. If more services such as healthcare and childcare are made affordable through higher taxes on the wealthy, the inequality and hopelessness that many Americans feel with dissipate along with their support of this autocrat opportunist.
4
Wow. A piece that doesn't just rehash the obvious! And even the comments are reasoned (for the most part).
We need more of this and less hysteria. Hysteria just plays into Trump's small hands (couldn't resist), and hardens the resolve of his base. As for their patience, Trump voters will even tolerate economic hardship in the name of sticking it to elites and foreigners (via trade war), but will not take kindly to redistribution if it positively impacts those of whom they disapprove ("those people" and non-working whites). That's why EARNED-income tax credits will fly--by definition they don't accrue to the non-workers that working-class whites resent {non-workers tend not to vote, and when they do they often vote against their own best interests; saying, for example, "I don't have Obamacare, I have [fill-in-the-blank with whatever Medicaid-expansion is called in my state]."}
We need more of this and less hysteria. Hysteria just plays into Trump's small hands (couldn't resist), and hardens the resolve of his base. As for their patience, Trump voters will even tolerate economic hardship in the name of sticking it to elites and foreigners (via trade war), but will not take kindly to redistribution if it positively impacts those of whom they disapprove ("those people" and non-working whites). That's why EARNED-income tax credits will fly--by definition they don't accrue to the non-workers that working-class whites resent {non-workers tend not to vote, and when they do they often vote against their own best interests; saying, for example, "I don't have Obamacare, I have [fill-in-the-blank with whatever Medicaid-expansion is called in my state]."}
1
Thanks for doing all that research!
1
So, is Trump, like Hitler and Napoleon and Alexander and Khan trying to take over the world? He is exploiting the trends that are well explored in this piece, but what is his real goals? What will our checks and balances do to prevent a coup? Would his supporters recognize a Coup? Are we in deep trouble? or am I just stuck in another conspiracy theory? Keep the eye on Bannon!
William Trainor, I would say, no, our checks and balances won't do a thing to prevent the coup that I am guessing is already underway. And no, many of his supporters won't recognize it until their children are sent off to war or to the camps. And even then...
How does this thesis square with this: "Trump voters’ median income exceeded the overall statewide median in all 23 states..." It is from 538: https://fivethirtyeight.com/features/the-mythology-of-trumps-working-cla...
2
In this political cycle dominated by the figure of Donald Trump scholars should review the concept of populism.
Is Donald Trump a populist or a clever real estate tycoon/ media savvy which captured voters eagerness for real change in politics?
After all, the election of Donald Trump had not to do with his political charisma.
It had to do with his ability to behave and say disconnected thoughts mainstream politicians never dared to say publicly before.
Donald Trump is the result of a political system being divorced from society.
The consequences of Donald Trump president will sooner than later be felt by Americans and the world.
Initially, world leaders are lost and confused on how to deal with his tweeters. Afterward, Trump will be tested on his will to take action.
The question is: What IF foreign crises are good for Trump? After all, it gives the opportunity to unite Americans against foreign enemies. Ergo, to consolidate his dominant position in American politics.
Is Donald Trump a populist or a clever real estate tycoon/ media savvy which captured voters eagerness for real change in politics?
After all, the election of Donald Trump had not to do with his political charisma.
It had to do with his ability to behave and say disconnected thoughts mainstream politicians never dared to say publicly before.
Donald Trump is the result of a political system being divorced from society.
The consequences of Donald Trump president will sooner than later be felt by Americans and the world.
Initially, world leaders are lost and confused on how to deal with his tweeters. Afterward, Trump will be tested on his will to take action.
The question is: What IF foreign crises are good for Trump? After all, it gives the opportunity to unite Americans against foreign enemies. Ergo, to consolidate his dominant position in American politics.
1
Good question concerning whether a foreign crises would be good for Trump. Given his lack of preparation, communication, cohesion and ignorance, etc., it is unlikely that he and his administration will make the appropriate decisions and look deliberate in a crisis. While it will hurt, the people will be hurt much more.
2
Agree.
The irony is that Trump has stirred up the pot and there may be some hot zones.
Iran bubbles over. Trump takes off the gloves and crushes them. I dont know one Trump voter who would change their support. The Democrat leadershio just dont 'get it'. Trump has a rock solid base. Whatever his actions...decisiveness is what matters.
The irony is that Trump has stirred up the pot and there may be some hot zones.
Iran bubbles over. Trump takes off the gloves and crushes them. I dont know one Trump voter who would change their support. The Democrat leadershio just dont 'get it'. Trump has a rock solid base. Whatever his actions...decisiveness is what matters.
1
At the National Prayer Breakfast, steering off script, he's bragging about his ratings on Celebrity Apprentice. And, sounding more like a Las Vegas show host, musing about his replacement Arnold Swartzenegger. He absolutely asked them to pray for Arnold's ratings.
Ahead of the breakfast, Christian leaders denounced Trump’s hypocrisy.
As they question the president’s moral integrity.
"A troubled conscience is one hallmark of a great leader,” the Christian leaders wrote. “A conscience that is not awake to suffering and fails to respond is walled off from the love of God.”
Meanwhile, a copy of Trump's next Executive Order has him giving broad license to discriminate against the LGBTQ community and again attack women's privacy to determine health care with their physicians and exercise their reproductive rights.
Yep.
Sweeping plans to legalize discrimination + further restrict access to contraceptives and how a woman chooses to handle her pregnancy under the Affordable Care Act.
This is going to be a horrible 4 years.
Ahead of the breakfast, Christian leaders denounced Trump’s hypocrisy.
As they question the president’s moral integrity.
"A troubled conscience is one hallmark of a great leader,” the Christian leaders wrote. “A conscience that is not awake to suffering and fails to respond is walled off from the love of God.”
Meanwhile, a copy of Trump's next Executive Order has him giving broad license to discriminate against the LGBTQ community and again attack women's privacy to determine health care with their physicians and exercise their reproductive rights.
Yep.
Sweeping plans to legalize discrimination + further restrict access to contraceptives and how a woman chooses to handle her pregnancy under the Affordable Care Act.
This is going to be a horrible 4 years.
3
This summary of what delivered the presidency to Trump smartly delineates the identity divide in our country as well as other places. Readers are taken above the fray to where the wealthy are geographically in the USA, elucidates the division between those that support the greater good; internationalism, the rights of all... and those left behind 'culturally' and economically. It highlights how survival, race and patriotism figure into this divide. A possible solution to the chasm is raised: 'So far, emotionally-charged cultural issues cutting across economic lines have hindered the emergence of a new coalition. In the long run, a coalition based on the 99 percent is likely to emerge.' How will this happen? Trump and his like fuel differences, while the democratic party now represents the liberal elites without a message for us all. We are the 99% with much in common, but stereotyping and scapegoating fires up our war of words and strong animosity. Bernie Sanders and Elizabeth Warren bridge some of the divide, however, we must look to more leaders as well as the millennials to help join us together. How to minimize the horrific damage that Trump/Bannon and their crew will inflict on the people and the foundations of our democracy? Of course, they may self-destruct, but we cannot depend on that. The organization of us, the mobilization of citizens has begun. We must overpower the destroyers as we work to bond with our fellow citizens.
In response to PaulB, Ohio...Amen! As a lifelong Democrat (even as an elected official) I don't know whether to run, pass or punt I am so disgusted. Okay I was a Bernie boy but I dutifully voted for HRC. Continuing to dig your grave is a non starter. This sounds awful but just for the sake of winning why couldn't we find some white guy (sympathetic with our thoughts) and run him.
1
In other words, despite some confusion here -- Trump voters don't discount the state of the economy more Clinton voters, they just express their dismay differently -- we have a country in which every respected talking head is a social liberal, and good establishment people everywhere will dress down a racial or homophobic slur, but no one will be caught uttering the word "class" on national TV.
Obama saved the banks and then abandoned the home owners and people who work for a living. What did Democrats expect would happen?
Obama saved the banks and then abandoned the home owners and people who work for a living. What did Democrats expect would happen?
2
Trump will fail because he cannot and will not do the things he promised. He especially can't make this country white again or bring back those jobs. Indeed, he is choosing a cabinet and pursuing policies that are going to make every person who voted for him have a much harder life. He is peeling off voters every day. The big question is what comes next. The GOP is hoping once they get to enact their long coveted agenda it will be them. The Dems are still in the weeds. The American people are taking to the streets, looking for a leader. No one yet knows what is to come. Interesting times to live in.
2
I'm almost tempted to say we're stating the obvious here. Liberal elites had their heads buried in the sand pandering to the flower generation while Trump walked away with three branches of government. Democrats even rejected a non-xenophobic populist candidate in favor of a socially postmaterial but otherwise conservative elitist. You couldn't have missed the nail more even swinging two hammers.
However, there's another side to this story I think we're overlooking. There's a reason GDP is increasingly concentrated in a few major cities. Much of rural America is dying a slow death. The young and the mobile move to major cities. That's where you find jobs. Everyone else is stuck either by habit or circumstance. You can believe they're resentful. The urban transplants either embrace multiculturalism or become resentful too.
Neither establishment party has done anything to address this problem. The major parties don't even attempt to offer a coherent explanation. Actually, the drowning of exurban and rural America isn't even acknowledged. For both sides, recognition would be an admission of 30+ years of post-Reagan policy failure. The pie grows bigger but only if you live in the right place and know the right people. That's the antithesis of the exurban interpretation of freedom and liberty.
Enter Trump stage right: We don't know who to blame but we got to blame somebody. Here we are now.
However, there's another side to this story I think we're overlooking. There's a reason GDP is increasingly concentrated in a few major cities. Much of rural America is dying a slow death. The young and the mobile move to major cities. That's where you find jobs. Everyone else is stuck either by habit or circumstance. You can believe they're resentful. The urban transplants either embrace multiculturalism or become resentful too.
Neither establishment party has done anything to address this problem. The major parties don't even attempt to offer a coherent explanation. Actually, the drowning of exurban and rural America isn't even acknowledged. For both sides, recognition would be an admission of 30+ years of post-Reagan policy failure. The pie grows bigger but only if you live in the right place and know the right people. That's the antithesis of the exurban interpretation of freedom and liberty.
Enter Trump stage right: We don't know who to blame but we got to blame somebody. Here we are now.
108
Many among the liberal elites have more in common, economically, with the GOP. That is why many Democrats have increasingly drifted away from the focus on bread and butter economic opportunity that used to define the party. Even as they were moving ever further from the concerns of voters that used to be a core part of their base, Democrats assumed that enough of these voters would stick with them because they had nowhere else to go. Was 2016 a wake up call?
Bellicosity, not policy. Everything that ails Trump's base will get worse when Trump's policies are enacted. This is the curious dichotomy of the moment. Health will deteriorate when health insurance is not available. Prices will soar when other countries retaliate against protectionist trade policies. China will be ascendant as the US withdraws and our allies seek a more stable partner. The rich will get richer when regressive tax policies are enacted. Mortgages will get more "underwater" when inflation increases, as it has already started to. A crackdown on illegal immigrants will make the ones who remain in the US more likely to take any work at any wage, further compressing wages for the working class.
What the populists want is a more closed system, in terms of people, trade, worldview and aspiration. This is probably not possible. In the end, resources trump enthusiasm, and so many of the resources are in the hands of the globalists. But I agree with Trump voters about the negative effects of financialization, elitism, a deterioration in patriotism and civic duty in those elites etc. "Flyover country" is MY country, and it should not be dismissed.
But Trump supporters must be honest about the effects Trump's policies on their lives as they are enacted. This guy is never going to give the working class what they want, and you cannot eat pride, the deadliest sin, especially when it comes at the expense of others. More disillusionment is the road to more nihilism.
What the populists want is a more closed system, in terms of people, trade, worldview and aspiration. This is probably not possible. In the end, resources trump enthusiasm, and so many of the resources are in the hands of the globalists. But I agree with Trump voters about the negative effects of financialization, elitism, a deterioration in patriotism and civic duty in those elites etc. "Flyover country" is MY country, and it should not be dismissed.
But Trump supporters must be honest about the effects Trump's policies on their lives as they are enacted. This guy is never going to give the working class what they want, and you cannot eat pride, the deadliest sin, especially when it comes at the expense of others. More disillusionment is the road to more nihilism.
165
Most wars have unpredictable consequences, because they rely for their outcomes on too many variables to factor effectively. Even the confederacy came close on multiple occasions to winning, despite their lack of the appropriate industrial, financial and population bases to wage effective war against the Union.
Tom displays enough rings beneath the bark to know that when considering ideological movements, no grave remains filled for very long. “Post-materialism” will have its day again; and be interred again, most likely.
Different “verities” take on greater power to captivate, depending on the exigencies of the moment. Liberals, anxious for a return to the conditions that made “post-materialism” possible, might consider the economic difficulties facing millions of people in America and the West generally, and conclude that perhaps they should support Trump’s tax and regulatory initiatives UNTIL they’re proved to be ineffective – if they ever ARE so proved. According to Tom’s sources today, it would seem that a more general prosperity would support liberals’ social ends FAR more effectively than the mere “resistance” that some are urging on congressional Democrats.
Trump’s “populism” isn’t peculiar: for our times is was perfectly predictable; and predicted (here, by me).
Tom displays enough rings beneath the bark to know that when considering ideological movements, no grave remains filled for very long. “Post-materialism” will have its day again; and be interred again, most likely.
Different “verities” take on greater power to captivate, depending on the exigencies of the moment. Liberals, anxious for a return to the conditions that made “post-materialism” possible, might consider the economic difficulties facing millions of people in America and the West generally, and conclude that perhaps they should support Trump’s tax and regulatory initiatives UNTIL they’re proved to be ineffective – if they ever ARE so proved. According to Tom’s sources today, it would seem that a more general prosperity would support liberals’ social ends FAR more effectively than the mere “resistance” that some are urging on congressional Democrats.
Trump’s “populism” isn’t peculiar: for our times is was perfectly predictable; and predicted (here, by me).
1
Hillary Clinton's inclination to spend more time with Goldman Sachs than with out-of-work people in union halls and unemployment offices said it all about the Democrats misreading of the rising anger and fear of those being left behind. If the Dems don't give full attention to these alienated folks, Trump will end up being president for life and any opposition will be outlawed.
3
Hamilton said it in the FEDERALIST PAPERS, not once but twice, beware of the demagogue, the biggest threat to democracy.
They have reared their ugly head since the first one Alcibides in Classical Athens who helped cause the death of the iconic Socrates, to the latest one the late demagogue from Venz., Chavez.
Trump is just another demagogue that has littered history.
He may succeed for a while, the people will cheer but sooner or later will bring damage and/or ruin to our country.
It is just a matter of time..
They have reared their ugly head since the first one Alcibides in Classical Athens who helped cause the death of the iconic Socrates, to the latest one the late demagogue from Venz., Chavez.
Trump is just another demagogue that has littered history.
He may succeed for a while, the people will cheer but sooner or later will bring damage and/or ruin to our country.
It is just a matter of time..
4
Liberals like to try and assuage their ego by claiming that Trump voters are uneducated country bumpkins.
That they lost to a bunch of country bumpkins never quite registers though.
That they lost to a bunch of country bumpkins never quite registers though.
3
No, we realize too well that we lost to a bunch of country bumpkins. And we also realize this does not bode well for our country.
3
Country bumpkins helped by Russia, though, and by a candidate who could never clearly state in a simple way what she stood for. Nevertheless, the liberal cities generate the cash and the bumpkins are dependent on handouts of that cash. Were I a bumpkin, which I might be, I would be concerned about that.
1
More people voted for Clinton. Many more were discouraged from voting by republican ballot suppression scams in key states. And many people just didn't bother to vote, thinking a Trump victory was impossible. Boy were they wrong. Given those things combined with a broken election process and the political ineptitude of the democratic party, the impossible has happened - and it is disastrous.
1
The political career of Trump began with the birther lie. The whole "movement" has had to rely on lies to gain power. Trump beat out 16 other contenders for the nomination because he was the one candidate willing to say openly white supremacist statements. And he was the one candidate willing to lie almost every time he opened his mouth. I live in the South. Economic hardship had almost nothing to do with his popularity here. It had to do with his willingness to appeal to white supremacy which the majority of white Southerners still believe in although they do not identify it as such.
335
Virginia is actually a DC bedroom state and is full of wealthy yuppies. It's pretty much the east coast version of Marin County. Your refusal to admit that poor whites exist is why the Dems lost and will continue to lose.
Believe me, the Democrats were not counting on the South. It's the northern red states that were a surprise. Many Trump voters up there didn't like the nasty rhetoric at all, it was about the jobs.
One comment noted that the Democrats need to do more for people in West Virginia than Syrian refugees. This is comparing apples to oranges....the magnitude of the issues facing these two groups are not on the scale. I'm afraid that no political party can return rural America and the rust belt to the "good old days." Economics and business decisions drive where employers go to set up shop....Even if the industry that left many of these single industry towns was still viable, they compete with each other for jobs more than they compete with refugees. I have yet to read any comments by a Trump supporter that describe some set of actions or policies that would actually deliver increased prosperity to their region...it all seems to be some kind of magical thinking.
7
Correct - like Trump will also bring back jobs for buggy whip makers & typewriter repairmen.
2
How could they fall for this shyster?
1
You miss the point. The comment had to do with perception about loyalty more than with specific plans, and as a working class white person I have every right to notice that NY Times readers and other liberals seem to care a WHOLE lot more about the problems of Syrians, or Somalis, or any non western ethnic person than you do about working class people in your own country.
All of this data would make sense when applied to Trump who painted the world as an awful place and America as losers both economically and military. None of which is true but how do you then explain a Republican Congress? The Congress should have shifted 100% if you use the arguments presented were true. McConnell and Ryan wouldn't even exist and most state legislatures would be blue not red. No matter how much the far right rhetoric claims the Democrats are at fault it was under the Republican rule that -9/11, the Iraq War, the economic melt down of 2008 were all Bush/Cheney with support of McConnell/Ryan. Yet the McConnell /Ryan voters keep voting the same pattern even when offered a change. Is there another point not stated - people who consistently make bad decisions continue to make bad decisions when voting?
7
The Democrats betrayed postmaterialism when they doubled down on the neoconservative economic policies of Reagan and the tricklers. Bankers and Wall Street made off like bandits while the middle class was diminished and the working class marginalized. Now the beat goes on with Herr Trump in charge.
2
The author is confusing societal movements that involve acceptance to societal beliefs. People may condone or tolerate gay marriage more than the have in the past to be sure, but that's not the same as approve, support, or even believing it's the same thing. It's not even close.
And the crazy lefty's who are under the delusion that people moving to the center on societal issues means there's any support from them for the left. No, that's support for the center, but to the PC progressive left, there is no center, enough is never enough.
Well, people had enough already.
And the crazy lefty's who are under the delusion that people moving to the center on societal issues means there's any support from them for the left. No, that's support for the center, but to the PC progressive left, there is no center, enough is never enough.
Well, people had enough already.
1
You and others are still assuming that Trump means anything he says. You fool.
How many lies, throughout his campaign and his entire career and life, will you absorb and still react to what Trump says as real? What is the number?
This is not "peculiar populism". This is a fraud. These people have been conned. Trump's agenda is Donald Trump. Period. That's all he knows, that's all he understands. Anything beyond that is outside of his vision and grasp.
Most people he has dealt with have become road kill. I see that group of people in the crowd, many with those ridiculous red hats, and all they are is the same kind of group that trusted in, and invested with, Bernie Madoff. These people have trust in, and invested in Donald Trump. They are not going to see a sudden loss in their portfolios, so the damage will be too difficult for them to understand. Plus, Madoff was hauled off and put into jail, Trump continues to con them. These fools will probably never understand what hit them. Or, they will deny it. They will double down, just like the guy who has conned them.
Peculiar populism? Trump said what he had to say to get elected. It is only peculiar that after everything that has happened, you give it a description of anything other than the biggest con ever perpetrated on the American public.
How many lies, throughout his campaign and his entire career and life, will you absorb and still react to what Trump says as real? What is the number?
This is not "peculiar populism". This is a fraud. These people have been conned. Trump's agenda is Donald Trump. Period. That's all he knows, that's all he understands. Anything beyond that is outside of his vision and grasp.
Most people he has dealt with have become road kill. I see that group of people in the crowd, many with those ridiculous red hats, and all they are is the same kind of group that trusted in, and invested with, Bernie Madoff. These people have trust in, and invested in Donald Trump. They are not going to see a sudden loss in their portfolios, so the damage will be too difficult for them to understand. Plus, Madoff was hauled off and put into jail, Trump continues to con them. These fools will probably never understand what hit them. Or, they will deny it. They will double down, just like the guy who has conned them.
Peculiar populism? Trump said what he had to say to get elected. It is only peculiar that after everything that has happened, you give it a description of anything other than the biggest con ever perpetrated on the American public.
5
babyboomers from the 60s were (and remain) the worst. They let it all hang out then, and grew up to put Reagan into the White House and on up to Trump today.
Not this baby boomer. And certainly not anyone else in my extended family, baby boomer or not.
"Trump’s 'authoritarian xenophobic' rampage has taken him to the White House."
That statement in itself demonstrates that you just don't get it, Mr. Edsall. And I'm not going to explain it to you. Just keep sayin' what you're sayin' and we'll celebrate again in 2020.
That statement in itself demonstrates that you just don't get it, Mr. Edsall. And I'm not going to explain it to you. Just keep sayin' what you're sayin' and we'll celebrate again in 2020.
Lot of uncomfortable truths here, particular thought that being progressive/inclusive is perk afforded by financial security and mobility. That's something a lot o progressive people don't wanna hear nor dwell on.
The way I think about it- and maybe I'm wrong - is everything costs something. A black president? Wasn't free, man. We're paying for it with Trump.
What scares me is how we pay for Trump.
The way I think about it- and maybe I'm wrong - is everything costs something. A black president? Wasn't free, man. We're paying for it with Trump.
What scares me is how we pay for Trump.
1
This paper and corporate liberals play the same game of division as their opponents when they emphasize color almost to the exclusion of class. So here again we almost get to the issue of class but get distracted by color. If we had free college education as a matter of right, the working class would not divide over affirmative action. The democrats will continue to fail until they stop playing Clinton-style demographics and start playing with more class.
1
If we had free education as a matter of right two things would happen: (1) everybody would kvetch that their taxes are too high and complain about academic elites, and (2) colleges would contain a lot of people intellectually unable to complete a course of study or doing Mickey Mouse degrees like media/celebrity studies or golf course design.
So, it's not ONLY the economy, stupid--although economic insecurity is the starting point for demogogic appeal . . .
Edsall's analysis, and those of the people he quotes, provide quite a lot of food for thought. But one does wonder if the election of Trump would have been possible if the previous President had not been as much a symbol of "otherness"--and if the 2016 Democratic candidate hadn't been as well.
I suspect many white working class people who voted for Obama did so because he gave them hope of change, which Obama certainly encouraged with his campaign rhetoric. But when that change did not come rapidly to flyover country--when the recovery from the Great Recession did not touch most of them--they were ripe for a message of "see, the Black man advantages the line-jumpers; their situation got better and yours did not--and now there's a WOMAN running with the same ideas . . ."
Of course, one can not underestimate the power of conservative propaganda in demonizing both Obama and Clinton and misrepresenting their ideas. Hillary, in particular, could not advance a counternarrative (and strangely, neither could Barack). But the alt-right used modern technologic info dissemination channels far better and convinced those voters that the non-white/female/immigrant/LGBTQ "elite" was enjoying a party the white working class hadn't been invited to.
The question is who these people will turn to when the change doesn't come under a Trump administration, either.
Edsall's analysis, and those of the people he quotes, provide quite a lot of food for thought. But one does wonder if the election of Trump would have been possible if the previous President had not been as much a symbol of "otherness"--and if the 2016 Democratic candidate hadn't been as well.
I suspect many white working class people who voted for Obama did so because he gave them hope of change, which Obama certainly encouraged with his campaign rhetoric. But when that change did not come rapidly to flyover country--when the recovery from the Great Recession did not touch most of them--they were ripe for a message of "see, the Black man advantages the line-jumpers; their situation got better and yours did not--and now there's a WOMAN running with the same ideas . . ."
Of course, one can not underestimate the power of conservative propaganda in demonizing both Obama and Clinton and misrepresenting their ideas. Hillary, in particular, could not advance a counternarrative (and strangely, neither could Barack). But the alt-right used modern technologic info dissemination channels far better and convinced those voters that the non-white/female/immigrant/LGBTQ "elite" was enjoying a party the white working class hadn't been invited to.
The question is who these people will turn to when the change doesn't come under a Trump administration, either.
4
I will always vote Democratic as I remember what damage the Republican Party has brought to this nation during the past 51 years.
There is nothing about Trump that is a populist...
Populism is about uniting people, not dividing them... If we go back to the first populist movement in our country, Bacon's Rebellion' what was saw black and white laborers brought together... The white rulers weren't going to have that and pretty much every populist movement since as that in common...
No, what Trump's movement is is bringing HATE NATION together... There is nothing particularly populist about that... More like consolidating power around HATE...
If that sound familiar it should... That's what Hitler did, as well...
Bob
Populism is about uniting people, not dividing them... If we go back to the first populist movement in our country, Bacon's Rebellion' what was saw black and white laborers brought together... The white rulers weren't going to have that and pretty much every populist movement since as that in common...
No, what Trump's movement is is bringing HATE NATION together... There is nothing particularly populist about that... More like consolidating power around HATE...
If that sound familiar it should... That's what Hitler did, as well...
Bob
7
I appreciate this material and historical perspective as part of the explanation. Unlike the states like Wisconsin that have gone menacingly red through a variety of undemocratic intrigues using large sums of money from those who cannot legally vote in the state, the national picture is only partially explained by material and historical perspective. The Trump ascendancy was due to a perfect storm of so many factors, that many Republicans and Democrats remain in a netherworld of disbelief. More proximal to election day than material and historical trends was the political narrative on the left where mild infighting, light-hearted arrogant presumptions, and elitist language brought what should have been a progressive egalitarian juggernaut to its knees. We will do better. We must do better.
63
"Strangers in prosperity" is really the problem, for the working class and now the middle class, for the past 30 years.
The erosion of their share of the gains has been slow, insidious and invisible.
And human nature being what it is, we are going to look around for others to blame (ie scapegoats). This has happened repeatedly in this country when waves of Irish, Italians, and Germans arrived on the east coast, and the Japanese, Chinese and Mexicans on the west coast.
It is difficult for many people to feel generous toward their immigrant neighbors when they themselves feel squeezed out of the American Dream.
The erosion of their share of the gains has been slow, insidious and invisible.
And human nature being what it is, we are going to look around for others to blame (ie scapegoats). This has happened repeatedly in this country when waves of Irish, Italians, and Germans arrived on the east coast, and the Japanese, Chinese and Mexicans on the west coast.
It is difficult for many people to feel generous toward their immigrant neighbors when they themselves feel squeezed out of the American Dream.
59
Thank you! this is by far the most insightful and empathetic post of the past 3 months.
However, those urban elites that generate the handouts to those "squeezed out of the American Dream" manage to do so without resenting the recipients, for example the South with its Republican tendencies:
http://www.theatlantic.com/business/archive/2014/05/which-states-are-giv...
It's odd that Republican voters can't manage a similar charity of mind when it comes to refugees. It can't be because of a fear of violence since Republicans are far better armed than Democrats:
http://www.pewresearch.org/fact-tank/2014/07/15/the-demographics-and-pol...
There might, however, be other reasons:
https://fivethirtyeight.com/features/are-white-republicans-more-racist-t...
http://www.theatlantic.com/business/archive/2014/05/which-states-are-giv...
It's odd that Republican voters can't manage a similar charity of mind when it comes to refugees. It can't be because of a fear of violence since Republicans are far better armed than Democrats:
http://www.pewresearch.org/fact-tank/2014/07/15/the-demographics-and-pol...
There might, however, be other reasons:
https://fivethirtyeight.com/features/are-white-republicans-more-racist-t...
The point about the changing of values is simply Maslow's hierarchy of needs. If you aren't sure where your next meal is coming from, you're not going to think much about self-expression.
The problem with this analysis is that it doesn't take low information or what I'll call "counterfactually" into account. For example, what led blue collar voters to think that a guy who stiffs his contractors and has his goods made overseas is going to bring back good-paying jobs for them? Why the focus on Mexicans when automation is more at fault and Mexican immigration is in the negative numbers? Why demand repeal of their own or relatives' health insurance? And so on.
And what about the stat that the average Trump voter had a $70,000 yearly income?
So I still wonder about the "listen to their pain" narrative. Does anger prefer simple ideas like, "It's Those People's fault," against all evidence to the contrary? Of course instability and lower wages and worse jobs is a hugely valid issue. But how much pain are those making $70,000/year in? How can people believe coal jobs are coming back?
And, in particular, why does it all turn into electing an obvious con man like Trump?
The problem with this analysis is that it doesn't take low information or what I'll call "counterfactually" into account. For example, what led blue collar voters to think that a guy who stiffs his contractors and has his goods made overseas is going to bring back good-paying jobs for them? Why the focus on Mexicans when automation is more at fault and Mexican immigration is in the negative numbers? Why demand repeal of their own or relatives' health insurance? And so on.
And what about the stat that the average Trump voter had a $70,000 yearly income?
So I still wonder about the "listen to their pain" narrative. Does anger prefer simple ideas like, "It's Those People's fault," against all evidence to the contrary? Of course instability and lower wages and worse jobs is a hugely valid issue. But how much pain are those making $70,000/year in? How can people believe coal jobs are coming back?
And, in particular, why does it all turn into electing an obvious con man like Trump?
4
To sum up the article declining prosperity in the middle class, due to the failure of the distributive system, led to racial resentment. So why vote for the party that eschews redistribution? It's because that party claims it can bring back the old system if we just get the liberals and minorities out of the way. (Big government=liberals).
This sells because Americans believe in a myth of capitalist prosperity. (rising tide raises all boats) Until the losers in this system realizes that it was the government's thumb on the scale that created the middle class they will continue to suffer. It's easier to find scapegoats to blame.
Capitalism will always lead to economic imbalance without a rational redistribution system. Economic imbalance is a clear and present danger to liberal democracy. Will the failure of Trump to deliver lead to an electoral epiphany or reactionary behavior.
I am not sanguine.
This sells because Americans believe in a myth of capitalist prosperity. (rising tide raises all boats) Until the losers in this system realizes that it was the government's thumb on the scale that created the middle class they will continue to suffer. It's easier to find scapegoats to blame.
Capitalism will always lead to economic imbalance without a rational redistribution system. Economic imbalance is a clear and present danger to liberal democracy. Will the failure of Trump to deliver lead to an electoral epiphany or reactionary behavior.
I am not sanguine.
10
This is the story the media missed in the election. It should be required reading for all democrats except Bernie Sanders.
4
I understand this "America First" meme that Trump voters identify with. I understand their frustration of being "left behind". I would argue that they made their own lives worse by voting for the GOP that has not once in the last 30 years authored even one piece of legislation that put the American Worker ahead of corporate interests. I might also point out that poorer states did better when the House formed their budget with earmarks, which the GOP got rid of.
However, IMO what the right misses is the concept of "enlightened self-interest", that one does better when helping others first than with a "Me First" attitude. This extends to our foreign policy as well as domestic. Great civilizations and societies were built with people working together. "Me First" gets nomads.
Obamacare, equal pay for women, credit card reform were all things that put the American workers' interests ahead of corporate profits. But the Conservative states did not seem to like it, and put the GOP in Congress, where laws and budgets are made, for the last 6 years, and are unhappy with the results.
However, IMO what the right misses is the concept of "enlightened self-interest", that one does better when helping others first than with a "Me First" attitude. This extends to our foreign policy as well as domestic. Great civilizations and societies were built with people working together. "Me First" gets nomads.
Obamacare, equal pay for women, credit card reform were all things that put the American workers' interests ahead of corporate profits. But the Conservative states did not seem to like it, and put the GOP in Congress, where laws and budgets are made, for the last 6 years, and are unhappy with the results.
7
The used to tell the following joke in Moscow toward the end of the Soviet Union. "A man says to his wife, 'I need to find an ear, eye, and nose doctor'. His wife replies, 'You must mean an ear, eye, and throat doctor'. 'No, no!' he says. 'I need an ear, eye, and nose doctor. I keep hearing things that I don't see, and something doesn't smell right!'"
3
As someone who gleefully fled his boyhood small southern town, got an education, and moved to Boston, I agree that cities are home to liberal values. I celebrate these. Indeed, I feel increasingly that the Electoral College and Senate, with their outright favoritism of small, rural states, are intolerable and should be abolished. As Edsall points out, the top 30 urban areas in the US produce over half the nation's GDP. Cities are where the schools, the jobs, and the economic vitality are. Why should we be politically second-class citizens?
27
Urbanites should rightly remain politically second-class citizens to off-set their first-class economic privilege and power derived from the paucity of a corporate governance regime that elevates the interests of shareholders (read Goldman-Sacks) to the extreme, and as abetted by a world trade policy casting workers ( WTO ecomomists say labor costs will properly seek its own level) in both importing and exporting nations into a race to the bottom.
If you want Trump's victory explained, look no further than at a list of movies that will be released this year, as I did last week. The overwhelming majority of upcoming films in the United States are either based on comic books or feature a super-hero as the main character, or both.
Trump's followers, like Trump, love a simple story. Too bad for them that the world is not a simple place.
Trump's followers, like Trump, love a simple story. Too bad for them that the world is not a simple place.
13
So much more is coming. Trump showed how he would handle the repeal of the ACA with the travel/immigrationl ban. Cruelty and no compassion. That will be the repeal of the ACA, nothing to replace it. Same with medicare, medicaid and social security. It meets the goals of our being a survival society in which we deny those that we can any kind of rights at all, even food and survival. It will be dark days which will fulfill his campaign vision of America.
6
In my opinion your column has insight but is overly complex in explaining why Trump won a narrow victory thru a quirky electoral system. The midwest has been suffering since the 70's and telling this old timer that suddenly folks are voting on their resentment is rich. Hint, it's been happening for a long time. Trump unlike Romney added voters by selling himself as an economic progressive and he still lost the popular vote and barely scratched a victory. Over analysis I say.
8
I think this article should be required reading for all progressive activists. It helps humanize those who elected Trump and makes key points that should inform strategy for opposing him. My main takeaway is that howling over progressive issues is likely to inflame Trump's base, and in so doing make him stronger. Until there is a majority of Dems in the Senate or House, the only way to get anything done will be by recruiting some Republicans to the cause, both elected and not. Wailing and gnashing teeth over unwinnable battles won't get that done. It will take an inarguable issue, like rule of law--and that issue will have to rise above all others clearly enough to get noticed. Creating a wall of outraged white noise will only obscure such an issue.
17
A very thoughtful presentation. I wonder though, had only Mrs.Clinton captured the white working class vote and won the Presidency, would we have such intense debates in this country on "emerging" culture wars?
1
Recruiting just some of the vast number of people who failed to vote and persuading them to vote Democrat in the midterms could alter the picture in the House overnight. Some 45% of eligible voters did not vote, so there is a huge pool to draw from.
http://www.cnn.com/2016/11/11/politics/popular-vote-turnout-2016/
Turnout by younger people was especially low. Capturing this demographic could create life-time Democratic voters:
http://www.electproject.org/home/voter-turnout/demographics
http://www.cnn.com/2016/11/11/politics/popular-vote-turnout-2016/
Turnout by younger people was especially low. Capturing this demographic could create life-time Democratic voters:
http://www.electproject.org/home/voter-turnout/demographics
1
'Until there is a majority of Dems' misses the point. Those Dems need 'represent' the white majority...not just get support. If a transgender vote in Congress the Dem's representatives will vote....? Will they listen to the voters in San Francisco or the voters in Kentucky?
The issue with the Democrats is they are too far down the rabbit hole of 'Progressiveness'. The Republicans are going to dominate Congress for the next dozen years...minimum.
The issue with the Democrats is they are too far down the rabbit hole of 'Progressiveness'. The Republicans are going to dominate Congress for the next dozen years...minimum.
The irony here is it was the republican party that led the deregulation orgy that resulted in the overheated housing market and the financial melt down. It was the republican party that prolonged the recession by refusing to approve Obama's infrastructure expansion program. It was the budget cutting republican party that opposed providing retraining and assistance to workers who lost jobs through trade agreements. Yet those who were the most affected support republicans???
400
Yes, it is ironic. But it reveals that the deeper issues are primitive, lizard-brain fears that bubble under the surface and find misplaced articulations in immigration and xenophobia. It's easier to hate The Other than it is to dissect how the GOP devotes itself to supporting policies that help the 1% and hurt the rest of us.
That mess just always cracks me up!
Because most people blame the President, not Congress, for their situation. Let's see if this carries over.
1
The author categorizes issues like rights for LGBTQ individuals and the disabled as issues of self expression. These are not issues of self expression but of human rights that are inalienable. This is a matter of scapegoating by the white working class, scapegoating whose flames have been fanned by political opportunists. Newsflash: the Jews were not really responsible for Germany's economic woes. Equality for all and respect for the human rights of immigrants is not responsible for the poor conditions of the white working class. For that responsibility, look to those who have just taken power: the Mnuchin's and Tillerson's and Trunp's of the world.
7
The historic bridge between the working class left and the cosmopolitan left was the trade union movement, which was the anchor of progressive politics. The holy grail for progressives should be to find a formula for reinventing trade unionism in the current era of low wage, low security employment. Restoring living wages through protectionism and nativism will cause at most a short blip in long term trends. Until political leaders--and the businesses that finance them--recognize that the route to stability and prosperity is through a progressive-redistributive tax system, a much higher minimum wage, and stronger rights for employees, there will be no political alternative on the table.
204
This is a reasonable proposal and (therefore) unlikely to happen.
unfortunately for your proposal, markets for "tradable goods" -- essentially all manufacturing, mining, and many services especially finance -- are now global, and therefore national workers' unions have very little power. Note the fact that union members in the USA are now almost all in [non-tradable] services such as public employees, janitors, construction, repairs, etc etc.
The solution, or even amelioration, of our problems cannot come through workers, the labor market, or unions. There have to be other base.
I think (and hope) that identity politics has been tried and found wanting. Neither the Democratic nor the Republican parties seem anywhere near ready, or even interested, in facing up to this long-term political (and indeed moral) problem. The country awaits something new.
The solution, or even amelioration, of our problems cannot come through workers, the labor market, or unions. There have to be other base.
I think (and hope) that identity politics has been tried and found wanting. Neither the Democratic nor the Republican parties seem anywhere near ready, or even interested, in facing up to this long-term political (and indeed moral) problem. The country awaits something new.
Democrats forgot their own mantra. It's the economy stupid.
" Trump’s executive order severely restricting immigration and refugee resettlement from seven predominantly Muslim countries, for example – despite large protests here and abroad — has the support of nearly half of Americans (49 percent, according to Reuters-Ipsos)."
And therein lies the problem: None of the seven countries banned have produced domestic terrorism. The Muslim countries not banned have: Saudi Arabia and Egypt. Trump does business there.
The so-called "Patriots" with "conservative, nationalistic values" are being lied to.
Urban liberals engage in critical thinking. Rural conservatives want a binary narrative free of calorie consuming thinking.
And therein lies the problem: None of the seven countries banned have produced domestic terrorism. The Muslim countries not banned have: Saudi Arabia and Egypt. Trump does business there.
The so-called "Patriots" with "conservative, nationalistic values" are being lied to.
Urban liberals engage in critical thinking. Rural conservatives want a binary narrative free of calorie consuming thinking.
5
Let's call of this stuff what it really is: Nationalism headed towards Fascism!
5
The marginalization of so-called "self expression" values has made it nearly impossible to define national success as anything other than the predominance of white culture, nationalism, and material well-being. Success is now defined solely as a zero-sum Darwinian struggle with clear winners and losers, and patriotism defined as adherence to white supremacist, xenophobic, and exclusionary populism.
3
This analysis and Hochschild's "Strangers in Their Own Land" do a great job of collecting and presenting evidence a large, and growing, segment of Americans are "the forgotten men and women of our country". From a sociology viewpoint the analysis is credible. However from a political viewpoint, it is less than satisfactory.
Hochschild makes a valid point. The leaders of the Democratic Party have become today's equivalent of the "country club Republicans" that led the Republican Party fifty years ago. That time is the before, today is the after and the change is why the forgotten men and women feel compelled to support a promise to make America Great Again.
Postwar prosperity meant economic security and optimism to the majority of Americans. The country club Republicans were the postmaterialists then. The Democrats emphasized economic security for all and avoided divisive cultural issues.
The 60's exposed the inherent contradiction between the egalitarian ideals expressed in the Constitution the reality of traditional and religious values and widely shared racial prejudice. The leadership of the Democratic Party from Roosevelt to Johnson was guided by secular and rational views and inspired by those egalitarian ideals. The leadership of the Republican Party adopted a rhetoric of traditional and religious values as a fig leaf for their corporate welfare policies.
The Democrats obliged the Republicans with an emphasis on cultural warfare and abandoned class.
Hochschild makes a valid point. The leaders of the Democratic Party have become today's equivalent of the "country club Republicans" that led the Republican Party fifty years ago. That time is the before, today is the after and the change is why the forgotten men and women feel compelled to support a promise to make America Great Again.
Postwar prosperity meant economic security and optimism to the majority of Americans. The country club Republicans were the postmaterialists then. The Democrats emphasized economic security for all and avoided divisive cultural issues.
The 60's exposed the inherent contradiction between the egalitarian ideals expressed in the Constitution the reality of traditional and religious values and widely shared racial prejudice. The leadership of the Democratic Party from Roosevelt to Johnson was guided by secular and rational views and inspired by those egalitarian ideals. The leadership of the Republican Party adopted a rhetoric of traditional and religious values as a fig leaf for their corporate welfare policies.
The Democrats obliged the Republicans with an emphasis on cultural warfare and abandoned class.
4
Whatever Trump supporters want, Trump's actions will not get it for them. They kinda know that. The Trump voter is acting out of emotion; pure pique. Period. That Trump helps to dispel that pique by lashing out is enough to satisfy them. The habits of many Trump voters will not change to allow them to benefit from any changes Trump might bring about and they know that. For instance, if the rust belt has run out of jobs, go to another state or get reeducated. But no. They rather stay where they are, live off unemployment and part-time jobs, and Obama care. But they are angry that elites and liberals in the wealthy coastal cities appear to be doing just fine with their multicultural and multiracial faces. The great analysis by Edsal suggests that only a recognition of the emotional foundation of the angry crowd will help us to find a solution for it. I recommend that a clear throated call for a coalition of the wealthy coastal cities against the exurban diaspora is the first step. After all Civil War II is upon us and we need to take up arms and face it head on.
6
The point of the column...whihc several readers are refusing to acknowledge is that the Democrats lost the election by an almost blind adherence to identity politics. The votes of non-college educated whites were won by Trump despite the fact that the Democratic platform clearly had much more to offer them than the Republican platform. The speeches by Clinton and other leading Democrats, however, acted as if the only important people in this country were the members of groups being attacked by Trump. The use of the term "deplorables" by Clinton when referring to Trump's supporters literally cost her the election. You cannot ignore or defame the largest voting bloc in the country and expect anything other than disaster. Unless Democrats start communicating a real concern for white workers they are doomed to minority status, and the country is doomed to a succession of Trump-like clones of Vladimir Putin who has the patent on using the tactics Trump copied in order to mobilize people who feel forgotten.
10
I find it ironic that you criticize the Democratic party for its over emphasis on identity politics when Trump won by playing the white nationalist card to the hilt. While I agree that the Clinton campaign under appreciated the economic concerns of working class voters, her campaign was more inclusive than that of Trump who election was the triumph of white identity politics. I also agree that Clinton's description of Trump voters as "deplorables" was politically stupid. Somehow the Democratic party needs to address the economic issues of of working class voters be they white or non-white without abandoning its commitment to liberal social values.
1
Postmaterialism?! This is the first I've ever heard of it. But culture wars in America go way back. Resentment against blacks became the foundation for Nixon's "Southern Strategy", which flipped yellow-dog Democrats in rabid-dog Republicans. That was in the 60s. Then came the right-wing war against reproductive choice by women, and with that, The "Family Values" movement on the right.
In other words, the culture wars in America have been instigated and carried forward by the reactionary right wing, not the liberal left wing.
In other words, the culture wars in America have been instigated and carried forward by the reactionary right wing, not the liberal left wing.
9
I'm supposed to feel sorry for under-educated, short-sighted, unmotivated bigots and racists who haven't been able to pull themselves up by their bootstraps like everyone else has learned to do?
17
Now, just a minute. I'm on your side. But I'm particularly sensitive to the "pull yourself up by the bootstraps" argument. Not all of us start out on the same page. I grew up in near poverty, one of 8 children, in the 70's. I went to college with what I think the alt right calls "elites." I know where I came from, and don't consider myself an elite. But I do know I had to struggle harder to survive due to economic factors. Have compassion for that. I like this article because it helps me understand why these people would vote, unwittingly, against their own interests.
1
While I usually admire Thomas Edsall's analysis, I think he's over-emphasizing the role xenophobia plays here. Americans are a welcoming generous people, but they resent the abandonment of the defense of sovereignty which has allowed what? 25 to 30 million people into the country illegally in the past 30 years? It's not the line-cutters they resent so much as the people who facilitate the line-cutting, Obama being the number one culprit in that regard.
Here is a more knowledgeable essay on the subject of what is going on in our politics:
http://thefederalist.com/2017/01/23/donald-trump-first-president-turn-po...
Here is a more knowledgeable essay on the subject of what is going on in our politics:
http://thefederalist.com/2017/01/23/donald-trump-first-president-turn-po...
6
Trump voters, like Trump, think the world economy is a zero-sum game. And like Trump, they don't understand our political system, our Constitution, our legal system or our economy, and don't care to. If they want to tear down our country, as Bannon stated he wants to do, then they got their person in Trump. They put an egomaniacal sociopath in the most powerful position in the world. And because most of the Republicans in Congress are tribalist, the checks and balances that the framers of the Constitution thought they created, do not now exist. They only see a hand with a pen.
If those Trump voters want a piece of the ever expanding economic pie, developing needed skills or getting an education is a surer way of getting it. People with the skills the companies want will move to where the companies are and companies will setup shop were there are people with the skills they need. This rolling snow ball toward more urban and suburban areas is not stopping.
If those Trump voters want a piece of the ever expanding economic pie, developing needed skills or getting an education is a surer way of getting it. People with the skills the companies want will move to where the companies are and companies will setup shop were there are people with the skills they need. This rolling snow ball toward more urban and suburban areas is not stopping.
12
Somebody, probably Edsall himself, recently pointed out that the post Watergate crop of Congressional Democrats (which became the liberal "political" establishment) tended to downplay class issues. They also (compared with older New Deal liberals who experienced the Great Depression) were somewhat less likely to be confrontational to big business - especially the financial sectors of whom sophisticated New Dealers were considerably more leery.
Some of this generational difference was probably based in naive idealism. (After all, the tumult of the 1930s had taught "indelible" lessons that the Joe Bidens learned "to interpret" in college.) Some of it was probably political physics: you encounter much less resistance from attacking unsophisticated (and obvious) bigots than well heeled financiers who silently work out of boardrooms and penthouse suites. And along those same lines, some of it was probably the casual co-optation that comes from comfortable acquaintances and reliable campaign contributions.
There's also the "frog in the pot" metaphor. If the heat increases slowly, the amphibian may get lulled into a steamy stupor. But eventually comes the scald.
Some of this generational difference was probably based in naive idealism. (After all, the tumult of the 1930s had taught "indelible" lessons that the Joe Bidens learned "to interpret" in college.) Some of it was probably political physics: you encounter much less resistance from attacking unsophisticated (and obvious) bigots than well heeled financiers who silently work out of boardrooms and penthouse suites. And along those same lines, some of it was probably the casual co-optation that comes from comfortable acquaintances and reliable campaign contributions.
There's also the "frog in the pot" metaphor. If the heat increases slowly, the amphibian may get lulled into a steamy stupor. But eventually comes the scald.
4
I think American as a whole downplays class issues. Our national mythology is is built on the idea that we don't have a rigid class system, that we left that behind in the Europe. But class differences have always been here, though historically we haven't talked about them. The people who have talked about class have often gotten branded as "radicals" or socialists. We are uncomfortable with class differences, especially those of us who are several rungs up from the bottom.
2
This summary of what brought Trump to the presidency smartly delineates the identity divide in our country and in others. It brings reader above the fray to look at where the wealthy are geographically elucidates the division between those support the greater good; internationalism
Trump is playing to his crowd and not stepping on any of their core issues right now. It will become more interesting when he starts destroying healthcare for that crowd and other programs they depend on such as Social Security.
5
US public opinion has not, over the years, been that favorable towards refugees fleeing violent conflict: http://www.pewresearch.org/fact-tank/2015/11/19/u-s-public-seldom-has-we... . This is not an aberration. That link discusses opinions back to the WWII era. I do not think that "populist" defines the temporal swath we see.
Some do not like what they are hearing, but to consider it a break from past behaviors is just wrong. What Trump has done, better than many before him, is play us against one another based on long-standing internal divisions. And many of us have gone right along.
Some do not like what they are hearing, but to consider it a break from past behaviors is just wrong. What Trump has done, better than many before him, is play us against one another based on long-standing internal divisions. And many of us have gone right along.
7
God help me for writing this but what if we lift all the EPA coal restrictions? How quickly will all those people understand it is not the EPA & the democrats that took away their jobs but globalization and cheaper cleaner methods for energy. Maybe then we could get rid of McConnell & his like minded politicians, Bannon's Boy for one. It won't/can't happen
15
In addition to not having jobs, these individuals, many of whom suffer from black lung, will be left without health insurance. They were conned and I actually feel sympathy for them.
1
I agree... it is truly sad that the con won them over
The big competitor of the American worker is not the foreign workers of Mexico or China. It's the robot! And it smiles, as it goes about its work, happy that American voters are looking at the wrong enemy, now under attack by Trump.
3
Overall, Mr. Edsall presents a powerful argument that economic insecurity fuels Trumpism. However, it must be pointed out that Mr. Edsall cites two authors whose data are inconsistent with Mr. Edsall's main point. Inglehart and Norris argue that the populist vote arises from anxiety about cultural change, not economic insecurity. To quote: "Economic factors such as income and unemployment rates are suprisingly weak predictors of the populist vote." To quote, "...Clinton won voters who said the economy was the most important issue... while Trump carried those who said that immigration was the most important issue...." Mr. Edsall should address this apparent contradiction.
You could shorten this entire piece by simply noting Bill Clinton's election slogan: "It's the economy , stupid." When people feel comfortable economically they don't pick on their neighbors, whoever they are. The Right simply used this middle class anxiety to elect those who claim to have solutions.
But whether Right or Left, US or Europe, the problems we face come directly out of the globalization of the market and no country has come up with programs or policies that will address this basic fact. England in the late 19th and early 20th century faced this same shift of business from its shores to the US. England never totally recovered.
It is certainly also the case that neither the Republican platform nor DT has any idea about what to do, and the plans they do have are geared to making the rich, richer and sticking the bill on the middle class. Thus, both of these people talk about the problem but none of the things they propose (what are they?) will solve it and eliminating health care will certainly make things worse for the middle clas. Trump, under the Svengali eye of S. Bannon is ever more the demagogue "savior." But Congress is also useless without a head to corral them. S. Bannon is not at all concerned because his stated interest is in blowing up the institutions we have in order to create a "Lord of the Flies" economic free for all in which the super rich hold most of the power.
But whether Right or Left, US or Europe, the problems we face come directly out of the globalization of the market and no country has come up with programs or policies that will address this basic fact. England in the late 19th and early 20th century faced this same shift of business from its shores to the US. England never totally recovered.
It is certainly also the case that neither the Republican platform nor DT has any idea about what to do, and the plans they do have are geared to making the rich, richer and sticking the bill on the middle class. Thus, both of these people talk about the problem but none of the things they propose (what are they?) will solve it and eliminating health care will certainly make things worse for the middle clas. Trump, under the Svengali eye of S. Bannon is ever more the demagogue "savior." But Congress is also useless without a head to corral them. S. Bannon is not at all concerned because his stated interest is in blowing up the institutions we have in order to create a "Lord of the Flies" economic free for all in which the super rich hold most of the power.
1
I don't mean this to be as judgemental as it will come out, but I imagine the frustrations felt by the once- somewhat prosperous, once-dominant white demographic as Neanderthals might have felt millenia ago living as they must have among a growing, increasingly successful and smarter population of Homo Sapiens. Their future is doomed, and if they do, perchance, rise again it will be a distopian world for sure. Imagine your self in their shoes, how would you feel? Is there hope for so many to become educated and empowered enough to keep pace with a fast changing, increasingly technical and global world? I'm more and more sceptical.
3
As usual a thoughtful piece chock-full of food for thought. In the end, though, the future direction of politics depends on the state of the economy. If Trump fails to bring prosperity to exurban and rural folks, they won't continue to support him or the GOP.
Another important point: We are talking about these issues because support for Hillary was relatively weak, compared to Obama. If more minority voters had turned out, Trump would've lost. Blame the Democrats for nominating a political retread weighed down by personal and political baggage. A younger, fresh face would almost certainly have beaten Trump.
Final point: The people in rural America who have been left behind are not adapting to the reality of the world we live in today, and Trump isn't going to change that reality enough to turn their lives around. At some point these people will have to pick themselves up by their own bootstraps and change with the economic times. But most of them probably won't do that, so we'll have a long-term problem with a sizable minority of the population that is well-armed and permanently disaffected from the mainstream of national life.
Another important point: We are talking about these issues because support for Hillary was relatively weak, compared to Obama. If more minority voters had turned out, Trump would've lost. Blame the Democrats for nominating a political retread weighed down by personal and political baggage. A younger, fresh face would almost certainly have beaten Trump.
Final point: The people in rural America who have been left behind are not adapting to the reality of the world we live in today, and Trump isn't going to change that reality enough to turn their lives around. At some point these people will have to pick themselves up by their own bootstraps and change with the economic times. But most of them probably won't do that, so we'll have a long-term problem with a sizable minority of the population that is well-armed and permanently disaffected from the mainstream of national life.
I think the "elephant" that got into the room came by way of voter apathy. Were all those who did not vote potential trump voters? I don't think so. I am beginning to firmly believe that those who voted for trump will never have their minds changed about him, no matter how clear it becomes that his presidency is a disaster. They are a lost cause at this point in time. I'm tired of trying to figure them out beyond their obvious reasons for choosing him and quite honestly I no longer care to delve into their reasoning. The rest of the electorate in the US has to get out to vote and right now your mid terms should be the most important goal. The rest of the world is banking on the US electorate to get their act together.
4
I agree with KK! Thank you for posting. Voter apathy struck again--and with horrible consequences. ~Patricia H.
Well put, but it does not matters whether non-voters would or would not have supported Trump.
What does matter is that 230 million adult citizens watched a madman reach for the nuclear codes, and fewer than one in three of them lifted a finger to stop him.
What does matter is that 230 million adult citizens watched a madman reach for the nuclear codes, and fewer than one in three of them lifted a finger to stop him.
A really great piece, well written, data driven, makes total sense, and I can't help but thinking it's meaningless. After eight years of one party in the White House, it's really difficult to add another four years with the same party. Most of Trump's voters went with him because he had an R next to his name, nothing more than that.
and yet the "the party of no" is not held accountable for having none to little interest in economic and social development schemes which would benefit people in rural counties and states
3
Man doth not live by dread alone; the distraction of the Muslim or the Mexican or even the dream-hoppers will diminish as those economic realities press harder: underwater houses will not rise by trade-wars and border infrastructure.
There are two types of Trump supporters: those who think he will build the wall and those who think it was a metaphor. If he does not build it, the former will be devastated both in spirit and in numbers; if he does build, the latter will be dismayed as they realize that his political skill was just plain crazy. Either way he populism is at risk from his own favourite symbol.
The real, long term danger to our country comes not from Trump alone, but from the subversives residing in the Republican party. Voter suppression is the sword, the cudgel by which Trump's diminishing populism will be offset.
His arrival and the deliberate chaos make open season for State-level moves against liberal advances and particularly liberal defences of inconvenient principles. Unfettered by Federal government, the States will be able to eradicate abortion, to ameliorate protections for difference, simply to disenfranchise by voting regulations and boundary changes.
The devil works when good men look away - or are made too distracted to see.
There are two types of Trump supporters: those who think he will build the wall and those who think it was a metaphor. If he does not build it, the former will be devastated both in spirit and in numbers; if he does build, the latter will be dismayed as they realize that his political skill was just plain crazy. Either way he populism is at risk from his own favourite symbol.
The real, long term danger to our country comes not from Trump alone, but from the subversives residing in the Republican party. Voter suppression is the sword, the cudgel by which Trump's diminishing populism will be offset.
His arrival and the deliberate chaos make open season for State-level moves against liberal advances and particularly liberal defences of inconvenient principles. Unfettered by Federal government, the States will be able to eradicate abortion, to ameliorate protections for difference, simply to disenfranchise by voting regulations and boundary changes.
The devil works when good men look away - or are made too distracted to see.
6
Last evening during the swearing-in ceremony for Secretary of State, Trump said, “It’s time to bring a clear-eyed focus on foreign affairs, to take a fresh look at the world around us, and to seek new solutions grounded in very ancient truths.”
Ancient truths, not American values? Which ancient truths? This phrase is very dark and scary, reminiscent of the Nazi obsession with the occult and mythology and Hitler's notion of socio-political Darwinism. Further, hearing the term "truths" from a compulsive and prolific liar was stunning.
Ancient truths, not American values? Which ancient truths? This phrase is very dark and scary, reminiscent of the Nazi obsession with the occult and mythology and Hitler's notion of socio-political Darwinism. Further, hearing the term "truths" from a compulsive and prolific liar was stunning.
12
In general I like Mr Edsall's work, but this article must be one of his worst.
" ... social democratic parties in Europe shifted their interest away from economic policies, hard-pressed members of the working and middle classes — suffering from stagnant or declining wages and lost jobs ..."
If you accept this narrative, you are basically doing Bannon's or Farage's job. Social democratic parties in Europe support worker unions, minimum wage, a strong social net, universal healthcare, strong consumer and environmental protections. And conservative parties in Europe embrace the same principles, with very few exceptions (UK Tories). Even most "radical" parties agree to the model of the modern welfare state.
Mr Edsall even quotes an anonymous "liberal" blogger (what Europeans tend to give quite different names) waffling about "nationalist feelings" of the working class. Any discussion of xenophoby should mention the fact that it grows mainly at places where the percentage of foreigners is low, and that the right-wing "movement" is artificially created, i.e. billionaire-funded.
" ... social democratic parties in Europe shifted their interest away from economic policies, hard-pressed members of the working and middle classes — suffering from stagnant or declining wages and lost jobs ..."
If you accept this narrative, you are basically doing Bannon's or Farage's job. Social democratic parties in Europe support worker unions, minimum wage, a strong social net, universal healthcare, strong consumer and environmental protections. And conservative parties in Europe embrace the same principles, with very few exceptions (UK Tories). Even most "radical" parties agree to the model of the modern welfare state.
Mr Edsall even quotes an anonymous "liberal" blogger (what Europeans tend to give quite different names) waffling about "nationalist feelings" of the working class. Any discussion of xenophoby should mention the fact that it grows mainly at places where the percentage of foreigners is low, and that the right-wing "movement" is artificially created, i.e. billionaire-funded.
4
'Survival values" would seem to argue for the party that views health care as a right, protects social security, Medicare, Medicaid and public schools--incidentally all of which are used predominantly by whites.
In Denmark they are arguing about immigration laws, but no party is proposing to take away Danish health care or shred the social safety net. They prize the security of those programs. The analogy between the anti-muslim party in Denmark and here doesn't hold up.
For our citizenry, their ability to shut out the hated groups comes a steep cost: Tax cuts for the rich; increased income disparity; the loss of health care, social, security, and Medicare; environmental devastation; chaotic foreign policy. Our "populist" party is the only one poised to wreck devastation on its own voters. Sadly, Doctor, the medication cured the perceived "disease" but it killed the patient.
In Denmark they are arguing about immigration laws, but no party is proposing to take away Danish health care or shred the social safety net. They prize the security of those programs. The analogy between the anti-muslim party in Denmark and here doesn't hold up.
For our citizenry, their ability to shut out the hated groups comes a steep cost: Tax cuts for the rich; increased income disparity; the loss of health care, social, security, and Medicare; environmental devastation; chaotic foreign policy. Our "populist" party is the only one poised to wreck devastation on its own voters. Sadly, Doctor, the medication cured the perceived "disease" but it killed the patient.
13
The word populism needs to be used properly, not popularly. Populism means that something is popular with the majority of the common person. What Trump embodies is bigotry, especially since he represents a view that is supported by a minority of people. It is not peculiar, it is bigotry, and it is dangerous. There is a reason he did not get the majority of the vote, because his brand is not popular
11
Do not know how many caught it on CNN late last night, but Don Lemon had two Trump supporters on - one from Middletown, OH [a lawyer] and the other from VA talking about the travel ban. This five minute or so segment answers the question about Trump's peculiar populism.
If you want to understand why there is a huge red 'factless' hole in this nation, try to view it. Mr. Lemon was flabbergasted and tried to impart facts to no avail.
If you want to understand why there is a huge red 'factless' hole in this nation, try to view it. Mr. Lemon was flabbergasted and tried to impart facts to no avail.
1
Here and abroad, Trump's core objective is chaos. He is succeeding.
2
Great article.
Time will tell if Trump's 'America First' means to him (and his supporters) something akin to what 'Deutchland Uber Alles' meant to Hitler: 'invade and permanently occupy'. (We've had lots of practice over the past 17 years for the 'invading' part at least).
1
Great piece. Edsall and Ingkegart. But a bit too fixated on the authoritarian xenophobia. What about the retrograde sexism -- e.g., the White me backlash about improved female and minority situations so boldly proclaimed in Edsall's own THE BUILDING OF RED AMERICA?
And doesn't a resurgence of authoritarian xenophobia, sexism and racism suggest something like the revenge of political correctness' whipping boys (and, in the hinterlands, their spouses)?
And doesn't a resurgence of authoritarian xenophobia, sexism and racism suggest something like the revenge of political correctness' whipping boys (and, in the hinterlands, their spouses)?
1
Thank you for writing this. Very balanced overall.
But I wish to add something
Years ago, there was a letter to the NY Times from an electrician pointing out that all of the electricians in his town had gone out of business, because cheaper Mexican labour, many working of the books, had taken over wiring up houses. The only American electrician left in his town was employed by the towns code inspection department.
Liberal media describe such complaints as xenophobic, but for those who lost their jobs to immigrants, it is very real. Many wind up as long term unemployed. Alcohol, depression, failing marriages and obesity are consequences, not causes. As the Economist observed,"people voting for Trump were literally dying" .
As an economist: The economic cause is that job creation during the last administration did not kept up with population growth. That is why the labour participation rate (Fraction of Americans employed) fell. As 40% of US population growth is due to immigration, the US either needs to generate more jobs to match its population growth, or reduce immigration.
But I wish to add something
Years ago, there was a letter to the NY Times from an electrician pointing out that all of the electricians in his town had gone out of business, because cheaper Mexican labour, many working of the books, had taken over wiring up houses. The only American electrician left in his town was employed by the towns code inspection department.
Liberal media describe such complaints as xenophobic, but for those who lost their jobs to immigrants, it is very real. Many wind up as long term unemployed. Alcohol, depression, failing marriages and obesity are consequences, not causes. As the Economist observed,"people voting for Trump were literally dying" .
As an economist: The economic cause is that job creation during the last administration did not kept up with population growth. That is why the labour participation rate (Fraction of Americans employed) fell. As 40% of US population growth is due to immigration, the US either needs to generate more jobs to match its population growth, or reduce immigration.
5
Electricians used to have a union. Republican right to work legislation demolished that so that cheap labor could take those jobs. Don't blame immigrants on that.
1
If what you say is true, then why didn't the towns code inspection department cite every job done "off the books" and get them done by a licensed electrician. The argument doesn't pass the smell test.
1
Were the Mexicans legal immigrants?
Were the Mexicans licensed and bonded electricians?
If the above are true, they have every right to be here. The working "off the books" is a real issue--home builders really like their cheap labor. They should be reported to the IRS, but I'm sure they never are.
The town code inspector should be cracking down on anyone doing electrical work without a license.
Finally, where's the local Electrical Workers' Union. Their job is to ensure their clan is being paid a decent wage. If you don't employ union labor, usually the union will make so much noise about it that builders end up paying the same rate to non-union workers. Of course, we've been brainwashed to believe that unions are bad.
The U. S. Government has economists, too. They're tracking these trends. But the reality is that business likes cheap labor and right now business rules America.
Were the Mexicans licensed and bonded electricians?
If the above are true, they have every right to be here. The working "off the books" is a real issue--home builders really like their cheap labor. They should be reported to the IRS, but I'm sure they never are.
The town code inspector should be cracking down on anyone doing electrical work without a license.
Finally, where's the local Electrical Workers' Union. Their job is to ensure their clan is being paid a decent wage. If you don't employ union labor, usually the union will make so much noise about it that builders end up paying the same rate to non-union workers. Of course, we've been brainwashed to believe that unions are bad.
The U. S. Government has economists, too. They're tracking these trends. But the reality is that business likes cheap labor and right now business rules America.
While the US and other countries have moved to the left on "social" issues they have moved to the right on economic policy since the 1960's. Big banks, big finance and big corporations have gained more power with most major parties and the result is increasing economic inequality. If the Democrats in the US continue to favor the big-money interests and international capitalism voters will continue to turn to the likes of Trump, who poses as being on their side both socially and economically.
14
There is a lot to digest here and I'm glad that I stayed with Mr. Edsall's article to its conclusion.
Bottom line, the Democratic Party needs to return to its bread and butter roots. Sure, political speeches are always free to soar to rhetorical heights. But, narratives about "postmaterialism" and "self-expression" are empty to people who are left behind by the economy (national and global).
Unfortunately, Trump supporters voted for a government which will surely shove them further into the dark hole. This is an opportunity for a turn-around in 2018 and 2020; Dems need to seize it.
Bottom line, the Democratic Party needs to return to its bread and butter roots. Sure, political speeches are always free to soar to rhetorical heights. But, narratives about "postmaterialism" and "self-expression" are empty to people who are left behind by the economy (national and global).
Unfortunately, Trump supporters voted for a government which will surely shove them further into the dark hole. This is an opportunity for a turn-around in 2018 and 2020; Dems need to seize it.
75
Trump is not a populist. He's a nationalist. Know the difference.
79
Trump is neither. He is a malignant narcissist. Now, the people working the strings are just freaking power mongers with huge egos that do not give a rip about this country or the people tha tlive here.
This takes yet another angle on the extreme polarization now paralyzing our country. I have to agree with Wilkinson's view. The forces that have led us to this point have been in play for decades, and will certainly not abate. Now we have a minority, and a very small minority at that of true believers who buy into an extreme ideology across-the-board, arrogantly imposing its will on a better-educated, more affluent majority. That is inherently unstable, just as Wilkinson says. As a recent New Yorker article describes, many among the tech and financial elite are already implementing plans to escape social upheaval in the US, recognizing as they do the societal pressures building to a breaking point with no viable solution in sight. It is irrational to pretend that the poorly educated will somehow become capable of functioning in a rapidly changing economy, or that the forces of automation will suddenly subside. Quite the contrary. The practical solution - a system of guaranteed income - is not remotely politically achievable at present, and likely not for the foreseeable future. Under that circumstance, the future does not look promising for this country.
100
I've been arguing here at The Times for years that we need to reemphasize the concept of UNION - or a defensible, 21st century approach to nationalism, within which we rationally acknowledge the need to leverage the awesome power of a people's UNION to solve real-world problems, and guarantee, as best as it can be guaranteed, that all economic boats rise together.
I've also repeatedly argued that Democrats need to begin pounding home the fact that the laissez faire / libertarian capitalism the pre-Trump Republican party worshiped more ardently that Jesus himself DID NOT WIN THE COLD WAR. It was welfare state / stakeholder capitalism that won the Cold War - by refuting the economic critique of Marxist-Leninist forces within the western industrial world, and thus preventing those ideas from taking hold.
The problem is that as the DLC wing of the Democratic Party triangulated in the direction of Reagan, in order to win a couple of general elections, we largely abandoned our emphasis on the welfare state and stakeholder capitalism - with Bill Clinton going so far as to infamously state that "the era of big government was over". Never was he more incorrect.
In our era of globalization and automation, if we are to survive as one nation and one people, the era of big government must just be beginning.
In the world that the Republicans created, freedom's just another word for nothing left to lose.
I've also repeatedly argued that Democrats need to begin pounding home the fact that the laissez faire / libertarian capitalism the pre-Trump Republican party worshiped more ardently that Jesus himself DID NOT WIN THE COLD WAR. It was welfare state / stakeholder capitalism that won the Cold War - by refuting the economic critique of Marxist-Leninist forces within the western industrial world, and thus preventing those ideas from taking hold.
The problem is that as the DLC wing of the Democratic Party triangulated in the direction of Reagan, in order to win a couple of general elections, we largely abandoned our emphasis on the welfare state and stakeholder capitalism - with Bill Clinton going so far as to infamously state that "the era of big government was over". Never was he more incorrect.
In our era of globalization and automation, if we are to survive as one nation and one people, the era of big government must just be beginning.
In the world that the Republicans created, freedom's just another word for nothing left to lose.
40
Thank you, Matthew Carnicelli, for pointing out what I have been thinking since the Trump victory. Hillary Clinton was hoist by the Clintons' own petard, that is to say, the direction the DLC gave to the Democratic Party under Bill Clinton's auspices.
Now I have a question. Granted that economic and health insecurity moved the voters who ultimately elected Trump president, what explains the insidious and vicious response by these people to Trump's harangues promoting resentment, hatred, racism, and so forth. I am haunted by the memory of those crowds, unable to believe that they are Americans. How come Trump was able to evoke such odious behavior among supposedly white, Christian Americans?
Now I have a question. Granted that economic and health insecurity moved the voters who ultimately elected Trump president, what explains the insidious and vicious response by these people to Trump's harangues promoting resentment, hatred, racism, and so forth. I am haunted by the memory of those crowds, unable to believe that they are Americans. How come Trump was able to evoke such odious behavior among supposedly white, Christian Americans?
I don't understand why people who feel that they are being left behind blame someone in NYC or Silicon Valley for this situation but don't blame their state legislatures or Senators and Congressman. The GOP has had control of Congress and Senate seemingly forever. Same is true for most states. Obama used the veto sparingly. Is it jealousy? If so, okay. That makes sense.
318
The opportunities for dems in large traditionally red states like TX and GA are better than they have been in a generation. Will they take advantage or continue to put out single-issue or extreme leftist candidates that don't have a prayer?
Agreed. My brother and I were both born into modest circumstances in a dead-end town. I worked tirelessly and went to law school. My brother dropped out of college after one semester to hang out with his friends. Now I live a comfortable, economically secure life in a major city, while he scrapes by on the margins as a semi-employed laborer on an oil rig. He voted for Trump because he feels like he's been "left behind," when really, he made the choice to get off the ladder of progress on his own. Whose fault is all this again?
3
It's the same old story. If you're in the in-group, it's easy to understand that an "other" is the source of your problems. That's easy to grasp. Looking inward is difficult, and understanding complex systems is difficult.
Did the Democrats really "forget" the working class? Or did the republicans effectively block any help the Democrats tried to give them? I seem to remember the Democrats pushing to raise the minimum wage and other working class issues which the Republicans blocked. The Republican establishment allows progress in cultural identity issues because it does not cost them anything. Though there are more than a few Democrats in Congress overly friendly to the .01%.
Agree with the article. Populism isn't rational and has a short memory. Trump voters were convinced the last financial crisis was caused by minorities.
Agree with the article. Populism isn't rational and has a short memory. Trump voters were convinced the last financial crisis was caused by minorities.
12
This was a fluke, razor-thin victory, set up by years of right wing media, which has tens of millions of devoted followers. They viciously cast Democrats, liberals, the Clintons and President Obama, as literally evil harbingers of literal doom; "If Hillary is elected, this will be the last election!"; "America Lives...or America Dies!" Ad infinitum....24/7....on multiple outlets. The right wing memes are repeated endlessly in coffee clutches and lunch gatherings by the millions. Throw in Comey, Putin and WikiLeaks and trump still barely won. Ten million more voters picked another candidate. There was a subgroup of blue collar voters who have legitimate gripes about issues like the economy and the opioid epidemic, but the trump victory owes far more to partisans who hate 'the establishment' because of their petty insecurities and nasty competitiveness. I believe trump voters averaged something like $67K in household income.
16
First let me point out that words matter, and you left out the word "temporary "while referring to the executive order in question. I am confident that this was a simple error.
Trump won the White House because he was running against a dated platform created by the DNC. He was running against a candidate with serious flaws and who chose to hide from the media and spend hundreds and hundreds of millions of dollars negative selling. Trump had a simple message and he stuck to the message. The Dems biggest mistake was to believe they couldn't get beat which basically means they were out smarted by a first time politician. You better blow up the platform if you want to win again and start with the ALT Left which is dragging the Dems to defeat time after time.
Trump won the White House because he was running against a dated platform created by the DNC. He was running against a candidate with serious flaws and who chose to hide from the media and spend hundreds and hundreds of millions of dollars negative selling. Trump had a simple message and he stuck to the message. The Dems biggest mistake was to believe they couldn't get beat which basically means they were out smarted by a first time politician. You better blow up the platform if you want to win again and start with the ALT Left which is dragging the Dems to defeat time after time.
5
Another way to think about this is that many Trump voters, those in good shape materially, were fashioning a newer version of post-materialism. While HRC was the one emphasizing economic benefits of government, Trump emphasized the identity-crafting role of government. HRC seemed more backward looking and rawly materialistic in many senses than Trump, as weird as he is. Think of Trump as post-materialistic and you can see why he could appeal to the middle class. By comparison, HRC seemed elitist.
1
Excellent analysis and data to back it. What's the solution?
I sincerely hope that the US doesn't descend into chaotic self-destruction.
I sincerely hope that the US doesn't descend into chaotic self-destruction.
3
Best Case: a return to real federalism. Drastically reduce the scope and power of the federal govt, returning it to its very limited enumerated powers. States can govern their own affairs. We could vote with our feet and all be happy.
Middle Case: slow coming apart until peaceful separation. Amicable divorce.
Worst Case: Violent separation.
Middle Case: slow coming apart until peaceful separation. Amicable divorce.
Worst Case: Violent separation.
1
Let's see if anger at the liberals gets them the jobs they want, the better healthcare instead of the despicable Obamacare, the working man's tax relief and their choice to send their kids to christian schools on the public dime. I'll bet it won't. I'll bet Trump is going to screw them.
30
But they'll still blame the immigrants -- and any American citizen who looks like them. That is when it will get really scary.
Oh they may get what they want, but....they will pay for it. Who will pay for the wall? Who will pay for all the people that lose healthcare and wind up sicker and only able to get healthcare in the ER, and who will pay for the increased crime and higher rates of poverty that will result from a two tiered education system. The problem for all of the making America great again is there will be a price to pay for it. What's the old adage: pay me now or pay me later. Later, the bill is always bigger. One needs to consider all the consequences before signing on. The one common denominator to all of the Republican plans is : there has to be a profit margin or it isn't going to make America great again. And who do you think will benefit from that profit? Hint: not the people wearing the red hats.
Let's see, indeed! Part of me just wants the democrats to take a backseat and allow the republicans to run the game, learning all their lessons the hard way. When you're in charge of everything, you have to deliver. And republicans can't, because they've been peddling a fantasy.
The problem is that we have a leader who was elected and not an elected leader
2
No, he was _S_elected by the electoral college, because of a vote-allocation process that has become increasingly distorted in the past century. Unfortunately most people are simply willing to scream that the EC works or fails based on their candidate instead of looking at WHY it has reversed the popular vote in two of the last five elections.
A number of scholars have looked at the unintended consequences of an early-20th century law that capped the size of both the House and the EC. The US population has tripled since then and it's now mathematically impossible to allocate congressional electors equitably based on population. It's produced absurdities such as DE and WY each having one congressional elector despite a 90% difference in size. Some other states have two, three or four fewer electors than they would have under the rules in effect before the cap.
The population isn't going to shrink and people aren't going to choose where to live based on their state's vote in the EC, meaning this distortion will keep getting worse and "split" elections will happen more frequently. That's as big a risk to our stability as anything else dividing our country.
A number of scholars have looked at the unintended consequences of an early-20th century law that capped the size of both the House and the EC. The US population has tripled since then and it's now mathematically impossible to allocate congressional electors equitably based on population. It's produced absurdities such as DE and WY each having one congressional elector despite a 90% difference in size. Some other states have two, three or four fewer electors than they would have under the rules in effect before the cap.
The population isn't going to shrink and people aren't going to choose where to live based on their state's vote in the EC, meaning this distortion will keep getting worse and "split" elections will happen more frequently. That's as big a risk to our stability as anything else dividing our country.
The collapse of Christianity in the face of modernity is also important in this analysis. During the same period of time, Christianity lost it's spiritual center, becoming overtly political and increasingly catering to an audience culled from television and housed in tribal suburban McChurches. Gone are compassion, humility, self-denial and sacrifice. Without this spiritual firewall, we've elected as president an intolerant, greedy and spiritually bankrupt demagogue.
12
Still, they're being hustled, and they would have had a better chance with a less obstructed liberal administration than they will with this one. A lot of people don't seem to know when they're being lied to. I canvassed for Hillary, and met Trump voters who believed that Sandy Hook was staged, that Hillary was personally responsible for the deaths in Benghazi. Please don't find another way to blame this on liberals.
46
Looking to "experts" for an explanation is fruitless. Action is required.
2
The clever Republicans have managed to convince the Trumpistas that the Wall-street led economic crash, taking home vales into the abyss, was the Democrats and Obama's fault.
A conservative friend said it was Clinton's policies to MAKE banks give home loans to people ('those people') who couldn't afford them. And the poor, helpless bankers couldn't help but comply, especially when they discovered they could just dump the high risk mortgages onto bundlers who fraudulently sold them to investors. Everyone in the chain got rich, of course, until the bottom fell out.
A conservative friend said it was Clinton's policies to MAKE banks give home loans to people ('those people') who couldn't afford them. And the poor, helpless bankers couldn't help but comply, especially when they discovered they could just dump the high risk mortgages onto bundlers who fraudulently sold them to investors. Everyone in the chain got rich, of course, until the bottom fell out.
7
Your friend was correct. The policy vastly expanded by the Clinton administration was the CRA ...Community Reinvestment Act. This had been around since 1977, but the Clinton administration wanted banks to make more loans to minorities, and threatened those banks with investigations, audits, and other Federal (Imperial) Entanglements.
So the banks made the loans and went to work finding ways to offload them onto suckers before they went bad.
So the banks made the loans and went to work finding ways to offload them onto suckers before they went bad.
It shouldn't take too many votes( just 73,000 or so in three key electoral states) to peel away Trump's win from last year if democrats can return to economic issues.
That's why I predict Trump will launch a uuuuuge infrastructure program in the next few weeks to both deflect some of the storm from his recent executive orders while also getting democrats to trip over themselves to get projects going in their states and districts.
King Trump and Herr Bannon know how to push buttons and the Democratic Party doesn't seem to have the wherewithal to respond.
That's why I predict Trump will launch a uuuuuge infrastructure program in the next few weeks to both deflect some of the storm from his recent executive orders while also getting democrats to trip over themselves to get projects going in their states and districts.
King Trump and Herr Bannon know how to push buttons and the Democratic Party doesn't seem to have the wherewithal to respond.
10
Yes and no. Look, the economic anxieties of ethnic whites (and by this I mean more than Italian-Americans, et al, and include white Northern European Protestants who still see themselves as the embattled "real" Americans) are displaced onto "patriotism" and "white pride." The GOP has hidden the upward redistribution of wealth and redescribed it as a lateral redistribution to "line-cutters." This is classically called "ideology"--false consciousness. You blame the Black guy because Mnuchin stole your home.
74
Absolutely. This is exactly what I see in my Trump-loving family members. They don't understand the complex forces that have led to their economic insecurity, so they turn to an easy explanation, like affirmative action or immigration. Trump will continue to exploit their lack of sophistication while profiting handsomely until we all meet in the same grave.
There was a liberal, in fact a socialist, who spoke to thousands of these white working class voters. He managed to speak truth to power, without trashing traditional liberal values. Sadly when he became unavailable, many of his supporters turned to the wolf in sheep's clothing.
His name is Bernie Sanders.
His name is Bernie Sanders.
41
Yes, but he is an old white guy, therefor the very incarnation of evil to many on the left.
1
Oh Jan, you are so right. I was one of 18,000 voters in Vermont who wrote in that very name on 8 November 2016.
In short, right or wrong, the ruling political elite and their support mechanism have been thrown out of office, at both the federal and state level, by their own. It is increasingly obvious, polarity will only increase as the media, CNN. The NYT, Washington Post, and Hollywood, re-group, as they have powerful media tools to get back in power. Obama may return as their spokesman as the Clintons messed up.
3
Trumpism will dominate unless and until Democrats demonstrate that they care more about people living in poverty in West Virginia than about Syrian refugees. It's as simple as that.
16
But it was Hillary, not DT, who advocated for raising the minimum wage, lowering college tuition costs, paid family leave, etc. Those policies would benefit working-class West Virginians much more than keeping out Syrian refugees. Yet they voted for DT more anyway; same with people in Ohio, MI, etc. That's why I don't buy the idea that the Democrats have abandoned the white working class. In their resentment, they would rather vote against their own interests to spite those "coastal elites."
1
Bingo! Post of the month.
Oh come on. The Dems always have supported social safety net issues. Sorry, the coal mine (like that was a good job) is not coming back. It is not an either/or situation. We can care for people here, and Syrian refugees. Trump is the one who says we can't.
This is all nonsense, I know plenty of well off white folks who are all in for Trump. And rural voters are driven by two things, religion and racism. The religion is this false Christianity called the religious right that has elected a devil to be our president. The racism is obvious so stop beating up on liberals like this is all their fault. Our Great Country that was founded on the principles of God is no more.
81
To religion and racism I would and sexism.
I agree with some of the comments here that Democrats must turn over a new leaf and somehow win back the white working class. Perhaps they should concentrate on the rust belt (i.e. the Midwest) outside the South. I am a native southerner, the son of a poor white from Alabama who was nevertheless a Stevenson liberal. He was dying for three years leading to 1958 before the civil rights movement got going. When LBJ launched the civil rights crusade in 1964 with the omnibus civil rights act of that year he knew the white South was lost. I am 72 now. I remember the good old days when I could go into a voting booth, putl a lever, and vote straight Democrat. Those days are gone. Too bad, the convenient lever is gone. I still never vote for a Republican but that is not enough. I have no idea how the Democrats can do it but they must try. Otherwise they will end up a one Republican gleefully put a permanent minority party.
14
The culture wars may result in policy changes that make Trump supporters feel better like limiting a woman's reproductive rights or by curtailing the rights LGBT people. That will help them feel we are on the right path. But the economic power is in the northeast and southwest as you point out. Pass all the laws you want, but when the money stays in the northeast and southwest, when people choose not to bring their money to your area of the country like they did in North Carolina, Trump supporters will find themselves right where they started and maybe even worse off. Where is the infrastructure going to be built? Northeast and Southwest, predominantly. And after the work is done the jobs dry up, just like the pipelines. And the big factories with lots of good paying jobs? Not likely to be staffed by the people who are looking for work. Lots of robots, though. Not likely the robots will be heading out for lunch at the local diner or having a few cold ones after work. So there won't be service jobs either. And the politicians who bought you the change you've been hoping for? Riding off to their post political homes, lobbying jobs, or resorts in.....The northeast and southwest. You may win the battle......
24
So, if robots will be taking what few jobs are left, why are we bringing so many immigrants into the country? Why - when the job situation is only going to get worse?
1
Mr. Edsall,
Thanks for once again taking a very complex issue and explaining it comprehensively and understandably. It does not quell my anxiety, but I hope that it is read and digested by Democrats seeking office.
I think that Sanders captured the essence of what you present, I don't know if other non-authoritarian politicians do understand.
Thanks for once again taking a very complex issue and explaining it comprehensively and understandably. It does not quell my anxiety, but I hope that it is read and digested by Democrats seeking office.
I think that Sanders captured the essence of what you present, I don't know if other non-authoritarian politicians do understand.
27
Oddly enough, it seems that Joe Kennedy, the new congressman from MA understands, even though he is obviously a rich person.
Trump voters " see themselves as victims of affirmative action and betrayed by ‘line-cutters’ — African-Americans, immigrants, refugees and women — who jump ahead of them in the queue for the American dream."
Trump voters have “lower life expectancy, higher rates of obesity, diabetes, heavy drinking and lower levels of regular physical activity.” They also have "higher drug, alcohol and suicide mortality rates.”
Their votes for Trump now make us all sick and miserable.
Trump voters have “lower life expectancy, higher rates of obesity, diabetes, heavy drinking and lower levels of regular physical activity.” They also have "higher drug, alcohol and suicide mortality rates.”
Their votes for Trump now make us all sick and miserable.
72
This has got bad enough that maybe we should pause and get our language in better order.
To begin: "populist". Some use it as if we were really witnessing a populist moment in America. They would be wrong.
Some use it almost ironically, as if they are referring to the scam populism of the late nineteenth and early twentieth centuries. They're getting closer.
And some use it in, if you'll pardon the term, a postmodern sense of something that looks and talks and struggles mightily to convince people out of the loop that it actually is genuine populism, but is really a wink-wink, Trump-grimace sham designed to secure unthinking support out in the field at the same time it provides cover for the genuine elitism and greed of the burgeoning Trump phenomenon. Bingo.
The point is, though, that whichever one you choose, please let us know early in the essay.
Here's another: left behind.
No, not the pernicious religious fraud lining the coffers of faux Christian authors, this refers to the sense or the reality or the easily exploited baseless conviction that a large swath of underpaid America "has not felt" the benefits of an apparently massive upgrade in the people's wealth and circumstances.
An odd argument, because it incorporates an admission that the "left" (maybe a later installment) has created a bubbling. beneficial economy where the "right" (ditto) failed, and somehow in the process managed to alienate about 90% of the population. OK...
To begin: "populist". Some use it as if we were really witnessing a populist moment in America. They would be wrong.
Some use it almost ironically, as if they are referring to the scam populism of the late nineteenth and early twentieth centuries. They're getting closer.
And some use it in, if you'll pardon the term, a postmodern sense of something that looks and talks and struggles mightily to convince people out of the loop that it actually is genuine populism, but is really a wink-wink, Trump-grimace sham designed to secure unthinking support out in the field at the same time it provides cover for the genuine elitism and greed of the burgeoning Trump phenomenon. Bingo.
The point is, though, that whichever one you choose, please let us know early in the essay.
Here's another: left behind.
No, not the pernicious religious fraud lining the coffers of faux Christian authors, this refers to the sense or the reality or the easily exploited baseless conviction that a large swath of underpaid America "has not felt" the benefits of an apparently massive upgrade in the people's wealth and circumstances.
An odd argument, because it incorporates an admission that the "left" (maybe a later installment) has created a bubbling. beneficial economy where the "right" (ditto) failed, and somehow in the process managed to alienate about 90% of the population. OK...
19
Commenters like NB from Texas illustrate why the Dems have problems; they hate the white half of the electorate, and telegraph that hatred very well.
9
That is completely false, completely. There is no hatred of anything by the Dems, and whites are not half of the electorate, they are more than half. Please get your facts straight. Dems are working to ensure all people including whites benefit from the opportunities our nation has to offer. People of conscience hate injustice, not people
In defense of NB from Texas, it's fairly difficult to like people who hate everything you stand for--education, labor unions, dreaming big.
I don't hate the white drug addicted unemployed people you talk about. But I do disdain them. Why are they so opposed to unions, the biggest factor in my family's success? If they had stuck with unions, they might still have jobs and decent wages. But those dues--why should they pay dues for protection? Fools--they believed that big business was more concerned about their paycheck issues than the unions.
And why do they dismiss college education? Nothing is more likely to protect a person from unemployment and poverty than education.
And I am dismayed and angry that, having failed to succeed, they now vote for a man who practically promises to destroy the America that my children will be adults in. Those voters--with their I can't get mine so no one should--is not the America we all grew up with. If they want to ruin their own homes--and they are doing a great job at that--let them. But for those of us who want a functioning country, perhaps they could leave us some clean air and water. And if they are lucky, some of those immigrants from Asia running tech companies may come up with technology that will help their miserable little lives.
Anger? The failing right has no monopoly on anger or disgues--as Washington is discovering.
I don't hate the white drug addicted unemployed people you talk about. But I do disdain them. Why are they so opposed to unions, the biggest factor in my family's success? If they had stuck with unions, they might still have jobs and decent wages. But those dues--why should they pay dues for protection? Fools--they believed that big business was more concerned about their paycheck issues than the unions.
And why do they dismiss college education? Nothing is more likely to protect a person from unemployment and poverty than education.
And I am dismayed and angry that, having failed to succeed, they now vote for a man who practically promises to destroy the America that my children will be adults in. Those voters--with their I can't get mine so no one should--is not the America we all grew up with. If they want to ruin their own homes--and they are doing a great job at that--let them. But for those of us who want a functioning country, perhaps they could leave us some clean air and water. And if they are lucky, some of those immigrants from Asia running tech companies may come up with technology that will help their miserable little lives.
Anger? The failing right has no monopoly on anger or disgues--as Washington is discovering.
2
Gotta call your hand. I do not think the average progressive/democrat hates white people. I just think they recognize this country was built on the backs of a racial group held in bondage and by the extraction of resources stolen from the native population. These two stains can never be removed. And frankly they have never been honestly addressed by either political party. Throw in the extraction of value from cheap immigrant labor in the agricultural and construction sectors and you have a trifecta. No, I believe you are the one who needs to do some soul searching.
This puts the blame for being illiberal on those left out economically.
Those left out economically put the blame on elite liberals who betrayed them.
Those left out generally are accepting of attitudes from the 60's and 70's. If resentment rose from 7% to 27% in the example used, that leaves 73% still accepting those values. That is a large majority.
Those left out widely said in the last election that they were betrayed by those who talked liberal but only took care of themselves and their friends. Betrayal. It was not just Trump saying that, Bernie said it too.
Don't hide from the problem by blaming voters. They vote, and those with their heads in the sand lose.
Those left out economically put the blame on elite liberals who betrayed them.
Those left out generally are accepting of attitudes from the 60's and 70's. If resentment rose from 7% to 27% in the example used, that leaves 73% still accepting those values. That is a large majority.
Those left out widely said in the last election that they were betrayed by those who talked liberal but only took care of themselves and their friends. Betrayal. It was not just Trump saying that, Bernie said it too.
Don't hide from the problem by blaming voters. They vote, and those with their heads in the sand lose.
10
Is Trump an anti-establishment populist? That view--pushed by Republicans & Democrats alike--ignores the degree to which a phony, reactionary "anti-establishment" politics have become a pillar of the Republican & media establishment. It probably began with Reagan's antii-government government and, slightly later, the explosion of the right-wing anti-media media. It isn't as if the GOP establishment is running for cover, now that their fascist poster-boy is in office. The Republicans have simply perfected the art of masking their upwardly-redistributive economic policy behind a purposefully vague anti-government populist rhetoric. Now we have Mr. Trump, who essentially promised to fight corruption by being the most corrupt.
As governing was turned over to lobbyists and campaign cash exploded, BOTH parties abandoned substantive economic debate. The ease with which Lyndon Johnson could link racial issues with economic policies that benefited everyone, or Nixon could propose radical healthcare reform, is now a distant memory, and the Republicans' flirtation with racism as well as the Democrats' flirtation with political correctness are locked in an escalating battle of provocation, obscuring the economic concerns that white Trump voters and minority voters share.
As governing was turned over to lobbyists and campaign cash exploded, BOTH parties abandoned substantive economic debate. The ease with which Lyndon Johnson could link racial issues with economic policies that benefited everyone, or Nixon could propose radical healthcare reform, is now a distant memory, and the Republicans' flirtation with racism as well as the Democrats' flirtation with political correctness are locked in an escalating battle of provocation, obscuring the economic concerns that white Trump voters and minority voters share.
4
It really is a "peculiar" form of populism, one that is not easily figured out. You only have to look at the number of counties across the country - especially in the midwest - that flipped from Obama to Trump. It really is astonishing, as shown in these charts from NPR:
http://www.npr.org/2016/11/15/502032052/lots-of-people-voted-for-obama-a...
In Wisconsin: 22 counties went from Obama to Trump.
In Michigan: 12 counties went from Obama to Trump.
In Iowa: 31 counties went from Obama to Trump.
So what's going on here? The debate here within the Democratic Party is between two camps: the economic camp and the culture war camp. I lean toward the economic camp, but I'll be the first to admit that the answer is going to be more complicated than just a simple choice between economic issues and cultural ones.
http://www.npr.org/2016/11/15/502032052/lots-of-people-voted-for-obama-a...
In Wisconsin: 22 counties went from Obama to Trump.
In Michigan: 12 counties went from Obama to Trump.
In Iowa: 31 counties went from Obama to Trump.
So what's going on here? The debate here within the Democratic Party is between two camps: the economic camp and the culture war camp. I lean toward the economic camp, but I'll be the first to admit that the answer is going to be more complicated than just a simple choice between economic issues and cultural ones.
4
Can anyone explain to this ole country boy how one can simultaneously support women's rights, sexual equality, etc. and mass immigration of those from a culture that systemically marginalizes women?
Would also appreciate a clear distinction of when "the right to assemble" (and protest something like a scheduled speaker) becomes anarchy and opinions on when, if ever, anarchy should be tolerated.
Would also appreciate a clear distinction of when "the right to assemble" (and protest something like a scheduled speaker) becomes anarchy and opinions on when, if ever, anarchy should be tolerated.
5
George, not all the people from those places believe in the repressive attitudes that you describe - that's why they want to immigrate to a place like America in the first place (just like the original pilgrims). You can't think of people in foreign countries as all having the same values and beliefs as the government in charge. You don't have to look outside our own country to see that.
1
I can't speak to that anarchy thing, but as a woman I can tell you this: do unto others as you would have others do unto you, and lead by example.
I would love to bring everyone here, show them our American values and our friendship, then, when things settle down in their various Home Lands and they go back they will think this: "Those Americans really have something good going on there. We like those people. Let's stop fighting with them. Let's be more like them."
Wake up, "ole country boy" you. We're not going to change the world by spitting in their faces. We are outnumbered on this planet by people of religions and cultures different from our Christian America. The days are gone when we can shove our culture down people's throats. Long gone. How about we learn how to get along with people?
I would love to bring everyone here, show them our American values and our friendship, then, when things settle down in their various Home Lands and they go back they will think this: "Those Americans really have something good going on there. We like those people. Let's stop fighting with them. Let's be more like them."
Wake up, "ole country boy" you. We're not going to change the world by spitting in their faces. We are outnumbered on this planet by people of religions and cultures different from our Christian America. The days are gone when we can shove our culture down people's throats. Long gone. How about we learn how to get along with people?
The infographics are terrific. However the map is deceptive because much of the area without blue circles are federal land, parks, grazing land, or just low-density. A color shading of population would add more meaning. For example the low income of the deep south would be more apparent. What is most interesting is that Las Vegas is not in the 30 MSAs and Charlotte has emerged as a center of wealth. Our Senate and electoral college is definitely biased against the blue circles.
1
Apparently, there is a popular mythology among us lefties that there will be an angry backlash among hugely disappointed Trump supporters when the "Great Again America" fails to materialize. Then Democrats will arise from the ashes with a coalition of impoverished former minorities (now majorities) and suckered whites who now smell the coffee.
This all assumes that the bulk of Americans will once again smoke on the pipe dream of every worker a coder, entrepreneur or fast food worker under a meritocracy fueled by education debt and upside down mortgages.
The real elephant in the room is not conservative Republican ideology, but simple, straightforward better than ever American style 1% fascist oligarchy. wrapped in a toga of Stars and Stripes and carrying a bible.
The challenge for Trump is to get the Orwellian state of constant war, electronic surveillance, and memory holes into operation before he chooses to cash in his chips in the biggest casino heist evuh.
This all assumes that the bulk of Americans will once again smoke on the pipe dream of every worker a coder, entrepreneur or fast food worker under a meritocracy fueled by education debt and upside down mortgages.
The real elephant in the room is not conservative Republican ideology, but simple, straightforward better than ever American style 1% fascist oligarchy. wrapped in a toga of Stars and Stripes and carrying a bible.
The challenge for Trump is to get the Orwellian state of constant war, electronic surveillance, and memory holes into operation before he chooses to cash in his chips in the biggest casino heist evuh.
9
As long as Trump takes action against what middle America thinks the problem is, no back lash. For example preventing those pitiful Syrians with nothing to speak of from coming into the U.S., will work if you think the reason you are not paid enough, or your town doesn't have enough jobs, or your kids or your husband is on opioids, middle America will be fine with Trump.
For some reason, thinking that supporting human rights is a repudiation of middle America's values. Supporting human rights was what I was taught was valuable 50 years ago in Catholic school.
For some reason, thinking that supporting human rights is a repudiation of middle America's values. Supporting human rights was what I was taught was valuable 50 years ago in Catholic school.
4
This is not a popuiism nor any other ideology. It is antisocial personality disorder defined by DSM 5: " ... a pervasive and persistent disregard for morals, social norms, and the rights and feelings of others: Individuals with this personality disorder will typically have no compunction in exploiting others in harmful ways for their own gain or pleasure, and frequently manipulate and deceive other people, achieving this through wit and a facade of superficial charm, or through intimidation and violence. They may display arrogance and think lowly and negatively of others, and lack remorse for their harmful actions. Irresponsibility is a core characteristic of this disorder..." While superficially they may appear to have an ideology but the only one they have is self and demanding admiration from others. Thus Trump loves his supporters' admiration but any criticism as by press leads to temper tantrum. When things do not go well they may progress to frank paranoia and dangerous behavior. It is not "Make America Great" but "Make Trump Great".
3
America today seems incapable of the fundamental human tragedy of necessary inequality--the inequality of having to constantly improve methods toward determining quality people in this and that field, rewarding merit, while not imposing on the majority of people. Instead America is tossed between raw leveling, a move toward equality which cuts into merit, and a reactionary unleveling which by no means promotes merit, just a naked grasp of power.
And this is supposing we can speak of an America at all anymore. We all are being classed--no matter how long our ancestors have been in the country-- as just immigrants with citizen papers to point we can no longer decide on immigration or whether we should even care about illegal immigration, or whether jobs should go here or there or whether foreigners take jobs or not...What is American identity other than dry and confusing and full of loophole legal arguments anymore?
And all this is overseen by a dry bureaucratic, technocratic state mentality which is obsessed with surveillance, control, legality, careful speech...Useless to speak of a Republic or Democracy--rather it appears as if America is like ancient Rome passing directly from a Republic to ending stages of Empire, bypassing all the emperors in-between, just desperately trying to administer natural citizens and influx of foreigners, pretending to Republic but moving toward total control attempts without circumstances permitting a gradual, natural development of empire.
And this is supposing we can speak of an America at all anymore. We all are being classed--no matter how long our ancestors have been in the country-- as just immigrants with citizen papers to point we can no longer decide on immigration or whether we should even care about illegal immigration, or whether jobs should go here or there or whether foreigners take jobs or not...What is American identity other than dry and confusing and full of loophole legal arguments anymore?
And all this is overseen by a dry bureaucratic, technocratic state mentality which is obsessed with surveillance, control, legality, careful speech...Useless to speak of a Republic or Democracy--rather it appears as if America is like ancient Rome passing directly from a Republic to ending stages of Empire, bypassing all the emperors in-between, just desperately trying to administer natural citizens and influx of foreigners, pretending to Republic but moving toward total control attempts without circumstances permitting a gradual, natural development of empire.
Immigrants and foreigners are being scapegoated and demonized - the hate and fear mongering are repulsive and unjust. They are simply reaching for a better future just as anyone would. Cheap labor is a winning policy of employers who hire undocumented workers and abuse the H-1B visa program. Cheap labor is immensely profitable and most of the profit goes to the top. Consumers get cheaper stuff. Win-win! Blame the Victim is a favorite sport of "winners". To the disgruntled, angry displaced: Drop Dead! Demographic change will consign you to the dustbin of history, you uneducated, xenophobic deplorable racists bitterly clinging to religion, guns and White Nationalism.
I blame Clinton Democrats for goading economic "losers" to the point where they took an axe to the Establishment and gave us Trump. Trump won the Electoral College thanks to part of the Democrat's abandoned constituency of workers. Sanders appealed to them by blaming the Billionaire Class and offering reform (basically a revival of the New Deal). Of course Bill Clinton finished dismantling New Deal regulations and one thing the Clintons share with Trump is doubling down - so torpedo Bernie, stir the cultural pot for all it's worth, and party with donors instead of courting voters of the Blue Wall. Ironically Clinton's Romney Moment showed Clinton being sincere and very, very credible.
I blame Clinton Democrats for goading economic "losers" to the point where they took an axe to the Establishment and gave us Trump. Trump won the Electoral College thanks to part of the Democrat's abandoned constituency of workers. Sanders appealed to them by blaming the Billionaire Class and offering reform (basically a revival of the New Deal). Of course Bill Clinton finished dismantling New Deal regulations and one thing the Clintons share with Trump is doubling down - so torpedo Bernie, stir the cultural pot for all it's worth, and party with donors instead of courting voters of the Blue Wall. Ironically Clinton's Romney Moment showed Clinton being sincere and very, very credible.
4
There is what I call an under belly of the US the ruling class simply ignored and to this day refuses to acknowledge. From being labeled deplorable to categorized a high school educated white folks, bothers a large swath of the population. Boggles my mind how the so called Democratic party elite could have been so so out of touch with their constituency that they lost 1,200 seats in a combination of state and federal portions where voting keeps their jobs. People are not fooled either. If the elite left wing ruling class figures out how to get back in control they will pick up where they left off. My favorite book about this is F.A. Hayeks The Road to Serfdom. Once in power, the socialist cannot deliver on their agenda. Obscene corporate tax evasion, and enormous wealth for a few bother people. They don't want a handout they want to work and provide for their family. Our African American big city ghettos get more attention than a pig farmer or prior factory worker. The ruling class cannot comprehend the effect.
2
We are now two nations. A nation divided against itself cannot stand. Do we strive for the lowest common denominator, or do we try to remain the world leader in technology and entrepreneurism? The next four years will provide the answer.
5
As usual Edsall's analysis is penetrating. But one element is missing. While it's true that relatively prosperous coastal voters (primarily BoWash) focus on 'nonmaterial" priorities that are largely irrelevant to the economically-declining hinterland majority (who tend to blame their plight on immigrants, blacks etc), it's not simply because prosperity allows one a broader vision. Instead, I suspect this broadness of vision (with a focus on nonmaterial issues) is what now fosters prosperity in the first place. In other words, the rural majority's narrow, America-first, vision, is actually undermining their own prosperity, because as the rest of the world gradually modernizes, it becomes ever more essential to work with the newly prosperous nations. It's a similar dynamic that led to the closure of 15th century Ming China. The US is becoming the 21st century Ming, under the Trump dynasty.
3
Sad as it is to say it, the left (meaning primarily the Democratic Party) has no answer to deal with the issues put forth in this article. Partly, that is structural: the Dems have lost control of Congress and the majority of state legislatures, and their outlook to re-establish control is bleak. Partly, too, is that Dems don't have a strong lineup of candidates at the state and national levels. They are caught in a Sargasso Sea between the old guard--the Clintons, Biden, Pelosi, Schumer--and new leaders who are more dynamic and results-oriented.
But the main Democratic deficit is that as it has pursued identity politics, it has alienated vast swaths of the general public, who are understandably more worried about their personal situations and economic security than they are about Syrian refugees or LGBT rights. The left doesn't even seem to recognize this estrangement; look at the candidates to be the next chair of the DNC. None of them appear to grasp where huge cracks have appeared in the Party's appeal to voters.
It is already clear that demeaning Trump and his supporters is a non-starter. Something far more useful and relevant is needed if the Party is to recover -- policies that impact the broadest possible segments of the population and would be meaningful to everyone, such as a single payer health insurance plan.
But the main Democratic deficit is that as it has pursued identity politics, it has alienated vast swaths of the general public, who are understandably more worried about their personal situations and economic security than they are about Syrian refugees or LGBT rights. The left doesn't even seem to recognize this estrangement; look at the candidates to be the next chair of the DNC. None of them appear to grasp where huge cracks have appeared in the Party's appeal to voters.
It is already clear that demeaning Trump and his supporters is a non-starter. Something far more useful and relevant is needed if the Party is to recover -- policies that impact the broadest possible segments of the population and would be meaningful to everyone, such as a single payer health insurance plan.
14
There was not a snowball's chance in you know where that the Democrats could get single payer through at any time during the last forty years. Ted Kennedy, a powerful politician, tried and failed. The best we ever got was a contorted ObamaCare which pleased nobody but which was at least a start.
What this country needs is for the Republican Party to move toward socialist policies such as universal health care, but they absolutely will not. They already hate Medicare and Social Security and would do anything to privatize them, get them out from under government oversight. The only reason they haven't done away with ObamaCare yet is that 20 million people have at least some sort of insurance, many of them having voted Republican. They can't lose that base. They're going to wait around, do nothing, re-name it TrumpCare, tell everybody the same deal is actually a better deal and people will believe it because it's not called ObamaCare anymore.
That's why we're in the mess we're in.
I'm not demeaning Trump supporters, I'm too busy pitying them. I am, however, going to enjoy my tax cuts.
What this country needs is for the Republican Party to move toward socialist policies such as universal health care, but they absolutely will not. They already hate Medicare and Social Security and would do anything to privatize them, get them out from under government oversight. The only reason they haven't done away with ObamaCare yet is that 20 million people have at least some sort of insurance, many of them having voted Republican. They can't lose that base. They're going to wait around, do nothing, re-name it TrumpCare, tell everybody the same deal is actually a better deal and people will believe it because it's not called ObamaCare anymore.
That's why we're in the mess we're in.
I'm not demeaning Trump supporters, I'm too busy pitying them. I am, however, going to enjoy my tax cuts.
Missing from the analysis are the dramatic losses of the Democratic party since Obama was elected. The concentration of Democratic supporters in urban areas has put them on the losing side of government as designed by the founders, where both the structure of Congress and the electoral college were designed to prevent a few large states from creating a 'dictatorship of the majority'. Until their message changes they will continue to lose. The mass demonstrations in the 1960s produced Nixon, a definitive backlash, and considering the current landscape we can more of the same.
4
Maybe, or maybe a junior senator saw a way to press a tactical play (based on new data base technology) to his advantage, combine it with his oratory skills to motivate a support network outside of the traditional party structure to get elected. The party would atrophy at the state and local levels allowing the other major party unusual success as they focused on state and local races.
Then when that junior senator left office, the weakened party structure got behind a technocrat manager who led an uninspiring campaign.
Occam's razor.
Then when that junior senator left office, the weakened party structure got behind a technocrat manager who led an uninspiring campaign.
Occam's razor.
3
The Democratic Party lost its way by getting on the wrong side to too many contentious social issues.
Drawing lines in the sand on guns, LBGT, abortion, the environment, etc. have alienated the party from its natural base, working people.
All of these issues are important of course but they should be prioritized if the Democratic Party is to return to majority status.
The Clinton wing of the party is the perfect example of the failure to embrace working families. They were all about courting the wealthy and powerful for financial support and their Foundation was pure access peddling.
Senator Sanders spoke to the working class and concentrated on economic issues but the party had conceded the nomination to the Clinton machine before the process even started.
The Democrats need to get back to basics.
Drawing lines in the sand on guns, LBGT, abortion, the environment, etc. have alienated the party from its natural base, working people.
All of these issues are important of course but they should be prioritized if the Democratic Party is to return to majority status.
The Clinton wing of the party is the perfect example of the failure to embrace working families. They were all about courting the wealthy and powerful for financial support and their Foundation was pure access peddling.
Senator Sanders spoke to the working class and concentrated on economic issues but the party had conceded the nomination to the Clinton machine before the process even started.
The Democrats need to get back to basics.
7
Hi Mike, I am wondering if there is a way to create a movement about economic issues AND the environment and LBGT, abortion, etc. For many Americans, those issues are the basics too. And the environment affects all of us, and energy infrastructure could create jobs for everyone. LBGT people and women are just as interested in economics as other Americans - there has to be a way to make these arbitrary divisions disappear as we are all in the same boat together. We all need good paying jobs, a clean environment, healthcare, etc.
1
You are essentially correct, but your phrase "pure access peddling" is simply wrong. A lot of good work is done through the Clinton Foundation, but Hillary Clinton was painted as corrupt and apparently you believe only that.
Like you, I believe we need to move forward on social issues, but not while we have Fox News spewing misinformation. It's always been very hard to fight irrational fear, and they are really good at fear mongering.
I voted for Bernie, and believe me I wish he had been the Democratic nominee. He is an honest man.
Like you, I believe we need to move forward on social issues, but not while we have Fox News spewing misinformation. It's always been very hard to fight irrational fear, and they are really good at fear mongering.
I voted for Bernie, and believe me I wish he had been the Democratic nominee. He is an honest man.
1
Thanks to the Times for publishing this helpful article. Please continue to investigate and report on the attitudes of middle America Democrats who voted for Trump. How are they reacting to his orders and to his cabinet selections? To what degree, compared to the coastal Democrats, are they protesting and calling their Senators and Congressmen?
As a liberal East coast Democrat, I recognize that I missed the big story of the disgruntled Democrats from the center of the country who voted for Trump. While I now regularly am on the phone voicing concerns to my Senators, I know protest alone will not be enough to win back Congress. We need to unite our Democratic base, and that starts with seeking to understand a broader set of views. We need the media to help us not miss the story going forward.
As a liberal East coast Democrat, I recognize that I missed the big story of the disgruntled Democrats from the center of the country who voted for Trump. While I now regularly am on the phone voicing concerns to my Senators, I know protest alone will not be enough to win back Congress. We need to unite our Democratic base, and that starts with seeking to understand a broader set of views. We need the media to help us not miss the story going forward.
1
I missed the power of Trump's supporter's fear of immigrants. I live in Houston and immigrants are everywhere. They seem quite innocuous to me.
Other important factors include:
The pervasive entertainment/media/corporate messaging which has transformed shopping into a religion and convinced us that we surely could be reality stars or be making a lot of money if only....it celebrates ignorance and feeds our discontent. ( Must go shopping on Thanksgiving for 3rd TV)
The role of Rupert Murdoch's Fox News that started this all and created the "new normal " of toxicity,ignorance and lies.
Technology - cable tv, internet,phones etc - that have contributed to cultural fragmentation and demise of professional journalism/news.
But also important not to forget - many affluent people voted for Donald Trump. Their focus was not "populism" - these voters were interested in ensuring their continued wealth (at the expense of others)
The pervasive entertainment/media/corporate messaging which has transformed shopping into a religion and convinced us that we surely could be reality stars or be making a lot of money if only....it celebrates ignorance and feeds our discontent. ( Must go shopping on Thanksgiving for 3rd TV)
The role of Rupert Murdoch's Fox News that started this all and created the "new normal " of toxicity,ignorance and lies.
Technology - cable tv, internet,phones etc - that have contributed to cultural fragmentation and demise of professional journalism/news.
But also important not to forget - many affluent people voted for Donald Trump. Their focus was not "populism" - these voters were interested in ensuring their continued wealth (at the expense of others)
12
I have trouble with anyone who describes an increase in human rights as 'a steady leftward shift'. The core right of an individual should resonate with conservatives. Understood that conservative does not mean Republican (and especially not vice-versa).
More troubling is the need for pseudo-conservative pundits to search for esoteric reasons behind the decline of 'middle-America'. No one was 'left behind'! Their plight is the natural result of our country's belief that capital is more valuable than labor. It is encoded into our system of taxation. it is the fuel behind our political process. It has been affirmed by our judicial system.
Building walls, expelling refugees, extorting neighboring countries, threatening business, tweeting incessantly will not change the core fact that capital begets capital. In a system that devalues labor, those who labor will be devalued.
More troubling is the need for pseudo-conservative pundits to search for esoteric reasons behind the decline of 'middle-America'. No one was 'left behind'! Their plight is the natural result of our country's belief that capital is more valuable than labor. It is encoded into our system of taxation. it is the fuel behind our political process. It has been affirmed by our judicial system.
Building walls, expelling refugees, extorting neighboring countries, threatening business, tweeting incessantly will not change the core fact that capital begets capital. In a system that devalues labor, those who labor will be devalued.
31
From reading this article, the phrase that comes to my mind is "death wish." Things are so bad for so many people that they wish to destroy themselves and, in the process, America. From all the statistics set out in this article, is it not obvious that improving the health care system and reducing the financial burden on people would alleviate a lot of misery? Wouldn't a massive education/jobs training program that assists people in moving from destitution to productive living give hope? Yet, I do not see either of these potential solutions in the current government's plan. The very thing the people need is denied to them. The people are instead fed a diet of hatred towards others - principally city dwellers and "foreigners" - but what good will that do? For example, what if we bar all refugees and deport all those here without proper visas, how does that make the life of someone in Scranton, Pennsylvania any better? Most foreign workers take jobs at the extremes: either low-paying manual labor most Americans won't do or high-end technology-related jobs that require a training and education. Without these foreigners, we still do not have the jobs or job-training Americans need. And obviously banning and deporting does nothing to address health care, which continues to bankrupt middle and lower income Americans. Where is the current government's plan for addressing these issues?
12
I think Bannon has similar motives to destroy even though he is supposed to be very wealthy.
2
These Americans have all interacted with the federal govt.
They do not believe it will help them. They have seen govt grow (in budgetary terms) while they grew poorer. They believe govt will be inefficient and cost them money. They believe govt will favor those who are members of a protected class over themselves. They believe that govt officials look down on them as rubes and deplorables. They believe that many govt officials don't care one whit about the country, but are merely self-serving in their sinecures.
And they are mostly correct.
They do not believe it will help them. They have seen govt grow (in budgetary terms) while they grew poorer. They believe govt will be inefficient and cost them money. They believe govt will favor those who are members of a protected class over themselves. They believe that govt officials look down on them as rubes and deplorables. They believe that many govt officials don't care one whit about the country, but are merely self-serving in their sinecures.
And they are mostly correct.
1
What seems to be missing in this article is the role that corporatists and their policy oriented lobbying efforts played in centralizing capital and hoarding of wealth and influence. This led to the undermining of redistributive forces like unions for example. This looks to have been initiated during the Reagan years and data suggests that we can go back that far to see the relative stagnation of middle income wages and wealth, anti government,sentiment, reductions in supports for public education, etc. . It seems that the role of corporate interests and power is sorely missing in this analysis. If corporations are being seen by the courts as people, aka Citizens United ruling, then Is there such a thing as corporate citizenship ? "Dark Money" makes the case for their long term efforts to influence policy and citizenship be damned.
18
What this article and others like it forget is that the economic distress of Trump supporters could have easily been relieved during the Obama administration. Had the Republicans been willing to go along, the Democrats would have proposed and implemented a large infrastructure program. They would have also put in place an increase in the minimum wage. And they likely would have been happy to approve an adjustment of the income tax to lean against the tendency of higher income classes to get richer and richer, and the expense of everyone else. Had the Republicans not stood against economic development for the people who became Trump supporters, those people would all be much better off now, and not voting in favor of anti-Muslim, anti-Mexico, programs.
44
Even if those that support Trump had been doing better financially it would not change their views on "illegal immigration." Obviously many on the left still do not understand this. Go live in a border state for a few years if you want to see how illegal immigration actually affects the citizens. As far as a "temporary" ban on people from terrorist supporting nations, even rich conservatives can see that it is definately a problem in Europe so that threat is enough to justify the ban. Period. Simple. So, easy that even a "deplorable" can understand it. The lack of acknowledgement of of our immigration laws cost the left the powers of government.
1
Much to ponder here, especially for us in the post-materialistic left, who never saw the counter, counter-culture backlash coming.
Our nemesis Steve Bannon had it right when he told the media to "just listen," which is what he said at the same time he said "just shut up for awhile."
However, the closed-eared and close-minded core of the modern left by and large highlighted only "just shut up." Unfortunately and predictably, we missed the rejoinder to "just listen," which is always sage advice. A nemesis can make its target stronger and more deftly adaptable —but only if its victim understands the contest to be more of a judo match than an out-and-out slugfest. Trump has won every slugfest.
Because "Economic factors such as income and unemployment rates are surprisingly weak predictors of the populist vote," anyone trying to actually win an election needs to take this curious anomaly into serious consideration.
Instead, the left has repeatedly and smugly chanted that the new populists/Trump voters were "voting against their best interests." By standing in lockstep support of this mantra we leveled slurs — "foolish" "rubes" and "deplorables" — upon the already economically wounded. We literally added insult to injury. We aimed gasoline at a fire.
Ironically, modern populism is itself a similar form of self-expression, ostensibly disinterested in economic concerns — similar to its nemesis the new left.
High time to think different.
Our nemesis Steve Bannon had it right when he told the media to "just listen," which is what he said at the same time he said "just shut up for awhile."
However, the closed-eared and close-minded core of the modern left by and large highlighted only "just shut up." Unfortunately and predictably, we missed the rejoinder to "just listen," which is always sage advice. A nemesis can make its target stronger and more deftly adaptable —but only if its victim understands the contest to be more of a judo match than an out-and-out slugfest. Trump has won every slugfest.
Because "Economic factors such as income and unemployment rates are surprisingly weak predictors of the populist vote," anyone trying to actually win an election needs to take this curious anomaly into serious consideration.
Instead, the left has repeatedly and smugly chanted that the new populists/Trump voters were "voting against their best interests." By standing in lockstep support of this mantra we leveled slurs — "foolish" "rubes" and "deplorables" — upon the already economically wounded. We literally added insult to injury. We aimed gasoline at a fire.
Ironically, modern populism is itself a similar form of self-expression, ostensibly disinterested in economic concerns — similar to its nemesis the new left.
High time to think different.
5
The data presented seems consistent with the idea that as people become more desperate economically, the more likely they are to turn to an authoritarian figure to save them. People seem willing to trade their freedom for a better sense of economic security. A "give" me a "job" and I will follow you mentality.
It seems as those voters who felt most desperate voted for Trump, despite the illogic that a corporate titan would do anything but use them for his own gain.
At the moment, Trump has a winning hand no matter the protests. With the Democrats seemingly without a clear identity, Trump's boundless showmanship is the order of the day...and perhaps the next four years. It will be up him and his administration to snatch defeat from the hands of victory. His supporters seem willing to go over any cliff with him, as long as they Believe there is a reward at the bottom.
The Divided States of America is about to face four years potentially worse than the Bush era. It may very well well determine just how much freedom we loose, not gain.
It seems as those voters who felt most desperate voted for Trump, despite the illogic that a corporate titan would do anything but use them for his own gain.
At the moment, Trump has a winning hand no matter the protests. With the Democrats seemingly without a clear identity, Trump's boundless showmanship is the order of the day...and perhaps the next four years. It will be up him and his administration to snatch defeat from the hands of victory. His supporters seem willing to go over any cliff with him, as long as they Believe there is a reward at the bottom.
The Divided States of America is about to face four years potentially worse than the Bush era. It may very well well determine just how much freedom we loose, not gain.
287
That trade off worked in Russia.
KB, the protests are important. Let us not go quietly into the night.
1
Potentially worse? That's just good stuff!
Fear, hatred and anger propelled Mr. Trump into office. it is continually stoked by 24/7 propaganda spewing from Fox and hate radio. Looking at images of the "faithful" is depressing because these folks don't hear or see the reality of what is going on around them - orwillfully choose not to.
Congress is paralyzed and fearful - We are in DAY 12 of the Trump administration and they've already overlooked huge conflicts of interest, destruction of American values through a Muslim ban, cronyism in the cabinet, a proposed rollback in regulations guaranteed to negatively affect most Americans, shoot from the hip foreign policy, definite plans to gut social programs and education, deadly healthcare reform and more.
There are few patriots with a megaphone that stand proudly on their values. I hope their voices are heard above the din.
Congress is paralyzed and fearful - We are in DAY 12 of the Trump administration and they've already overlooked huge conflicts of interest, destruction of American values through a Muslim ban, cronyism in the cabinet, a proposed rollback in regulations guaranteed to negatively affect most Americans, shoot from the hip foreign policy, definite plans to gut social programs and education, deadly healthcare reform and more.
There are few patriots with a megaphone that stand proudly on their values. I hope their voices are heard above the din.
446
I'm more hopeful than you. I believe that issues not in the headlines presently are being worked on in the background by our U.S. Government. I don't believe they have been overlooked or left behind. We will see.
We will not be broken so easily.
We will not be broken so easily.
And let's not forget that nice little war that Flynn started to stoke yesterday. An excuse to abrogate the nuclear ban with Iran, of course, almost guaranteeing the Mullahs will get their bomb in a few years instead a decade or so. Well, at least the Trump Presidency assures that Bush43 will be treated more kindly by history than he might have been otherwise.
@CF
Your optimism buoys my spirits but seeing the beatific (mostly white) faces is crushing - knowing that many of our fellow Americans will die due to lack of healthcare. How do they sleep at night?
Your optimism buoys my spirits but seeing the beatific (mostly white) faces is crushing - knowing that many of our fellow Americans will die due to lack of healthcare. How do they sleep at night?
Another way to look at it is that globalist elite opinions have become increasingly extremist and divorced from reality. People like Hillary Clinton took a hard line against excessive immigration as recently as the previous decade, but in 2016 Hillary was loath to express any principle putting any kind of limitation on immigration. I call this the rise of the Zeroth Amendment, the assumption that it would be unconstitutionally racist to keep anybody anywhere from moving to America because it would make the Statue of Liberty cry.
In reality, there are seven billion non-Americans in the world, more than five billion of whom live in countries with lower per capita mean GDPs than Mexico (and there are currently 35 to 40 million Mexicans in the United States). Any slackness in defense of our borders would invite the kind of mass migration that Germany endured in 2015 due to Chancellor Merkel's weakness.
For all his shortcomings, the elected President seems to understand that.
In reality, there are seven billion non-Americans in the world, more than five billion of whom live in countries with lower per capita mean GDPs than Mexico (and there are currently 35 to 40 million Mexicans in the United States). Any slackness in defense of our borders would invite the kind of mass migration that Germany endured in 2015 due to Chancellor Merkel's weakness.
For all his shortcomings, the elected President seems to understand that.
9
So many people have this absurd impression that we let people into this country willy-nilly with no vetting whatsoever. This is dead wrong. As to our southern border, it's porous only because American companies like their cheap labor and resist enforcement of statutes already on the books. Do a little search on E-Verify.
Very simply, the elected president is creating hysteria for no reason other than to agitate his racist base.
By the way, Obama was often nicknamed "Deporter in Chief."
Very simply, the elected president is creating hysteria for no reason other than to agitate his racist base.
By the way, Obama was often nicknamed "Deporter in Chief."
13
The Trump presidency will keep immigrants out because they don't want to come to a country with poor values. Any refugee who would prefer to go to the U.S. under Trump rather than Canada or Sweden should be considered insane.
4
Some of the 35 to 40 million Mexicans are legally here or citizens, and the rest are illegally here. That distinction matters to legal immigrants, which might have had a role in the higher-than-expected voter support for Donald Trump. At the end of the day, no matter how one romanticized illegal immigrants, a substantial number of ordinary people feel averse to break the law, not the mention the law of another country and in this case the most powerful country in the world.
2
While this may explain in part why perhaps ten percent of Trump voters voted for Trump but it doesn't explain why the other 90% voted for him.
I have a much simpler explanation: 100% of them voted for hate, hypocrisy, and ignorance and all the rest of it is a lot of social mumbo jumbo.
I have a much simpler explanation: 100% of them voted for hate, hypocrisy, and ignorance and all the rest of it is a lot of social mumbo jumbo.
5
I will say this every chance I get. There are many honorable people in red states that held their noses while they voted for trump. They didn't like the hate rhetoric, and they truly believed it would end with his election, that he would become presidential. They just wanted jobs back and they didn't think Clinton was the answer.
They were quiet before the election, and they are quiet now. But I'm sure they are shocked and disgusted.
They were quiet before the election, and they are quiet now. But I'm sure they are shocked and disgusted.
4
Quit thinking in terms of ideas and policies. Trump voters didn't vote for them. They voted for Trump.
This is a cult of personality. Trump's base agrees with everything he does and disagrees with nothing. If you think he said something terrible it's only because you didn't understand what he really meant. They project an endless stream of good intentions where none exist.
These people will do anything to rationalize their unquestioning allegiance to all things Trump. They will believe one thing one day and the opposite the next and come up with amazing leaps of mental gymnastics to justify the abrupt turnaround. But Trump doesn't bother to rationalize. He just says what he wants.
And they love him for it.
This is a cult of personality. Trump's base agrees with everything he does and disagrees with nothing. If you think he said something terrible it's only because you didn't understand what he really meant. They project an endless stream of good intentions where none exist.
These people will do anything to rationalize their unquestioning allegiance to all things Trump. They will believe one thing one day and the opposite the next and come up with amazing leaps of mental gymnastics to justify the abrupt turnaround. But Trump doesn't bother to rationalize. He just says what he wants.
And they love him for it.
658
Reply to Ben, Florida,
All Trump voters do not fit the cultist description. The cultists, so-called, in fact are a small minority. The vast majority voted for Trump because they felt abandoned by the two political parties, and had nowhere else to turn in their time of need. When you paint millions of people with the same brush, you are engaged in a form of misrepresentation that I'm sure you'd condemn Trump for. It has a name; it is called bigotry.
All Trump voters do not fit the cultist description. The cultists, so-called, in fact are a small minority. The vast majority voted for Trump because they felt abandoned by the two political parties, and had nowhere else to turn in their time of need. When you paint millions of people with the same brush, you are engaged in a form of misrepresentation that I'm sure you'd condemn Trump for. It has a name; it is called bigotry.
9
The faithful are still arguing that it was not a 'ban'...though POTUS tweeted that it was a ban...how's that for faithful?
3
trump voters have been primed for years by Rush, Hannity, Ingram, Coulter, etc. but they don't even know they a bobble-heads. It's just so much easier to bobble than to think.
2
This is why I read the NYT.
8
This is an extraordinarily fine analysis which I will have to return to. However it is not only economic factors that produce the failing health, attitudes etc. These are red states with Republican governors who have extremely reactionary policies returning to much older thinking. These states cut taxes at the cost of public services and the public good. They systematically rejected policies that were known to help people from education to health care to opportunities while transferring money to private interests and undercutting social programs.
What Trump has done is take the quiet bigotry of the GOP that consistently targeted the poor, the safety net programs and known beneficial systems and ranted and raved through hate rallies across the country reaching these receptive ears.
Racism, misogyny, Islamophobia, xenophobia, homophobia etc. have been deliberately cultivated by the Reojblucan Party including its open racism and hatred of the first black president from McConnell on down. NONE of them objected to the years of the racist birther lie including Priebus who is now in the White House along with the chief proponent of the racist slur against the Muslim Kenyan president. More the half of Trump's voters still conveniently believe this lie which reinforces their prejudices.
Hate mongering is not populism.
What Trump has done is take the quiet bigotry of the GOP that consistently targeted the poor, the safety net programs and known beneficial systems and ranted and raved through hate rallies across the country reaching these receptive ears.
Racism, misogyny, Islamophobia, xenophobia, homophobia etc. have been deliberately cultivated by the Reojblucan Party including its open racism and hatred of the first black president from McConnell on down. NONE of them objected to the years of the racist birther lie including Priebus who is now in the White House along with the chief proponent of the racist slur against the Muslim Kenyan president. More the half of Trump's voters still conveniently believe this lie which reinforces their prejudices.
Hate mongering is not populism.
73
In the photo, you can see adoration in their eyes!
5
Just like in 1930s Germany.
3
Hear that sound? That low hum is the heretofore silent engine of the dispossessed, the dismissed, the denigrated and the desperate. Our elite and their delusional henchmen created this vast cohort of now registered and inculcated voters, but it is we who motivate them. Unlike the felines the left can never corral, this herd is easily dressed right and marched in our desired direction. They will bloc vote in every precinct, without fail. Our databases are without peer and our techniques are proven. The difference is our "ground game" is disciplined, silent and gives no interviews. We move unseen, but our results are world-shattering. Or, hasn't that been noticed? We are extravagantly funded and not dependent on government financing or major media exposure. The drama is merely in its first act. The denouement will be a surprise. But not to us.
You could also give this analysis in terms of individual psychology; threat increases emotional arousal, emotional arousal adversely affects objectivity and dispassionate reasoning; in particular, the tendency towards us-them, zero-sum, black/white simplistic thinking. Which makes people susceptible to the 'arguments' that favour this kind of thinking, and its proposed solutions (hostile and authoritarian).
The evidence does seem to be that it is not The Other (racial or religious) that causes the economic hardship; obviously it is not African Americans or Muslims who have created negative equity. But the economic arguments are hard to follow and boring; and it is easy and natural to blame Other People.
I understand that people feel it is a failing of the Left to have abandoned these people. But it's not a solution to flatter their fallacious and self-serving thinking to win them back.
The evidence does seem to be that it is not The Other (racial or religious) that causes the economic hardship; obviously it is not African Americans or Muslims who have created negative equity. But the economic arguments are hard to follow and boring; and it is easy and natural to blame Other People.
I understand that people feel it is a failing of the Left to have abandoned these people. But it's not a solution to flatter their fallacious and self-serving thinking to win them back.
7
There are a whole host of explanations to the minority victory this administration achieved through the archaic electoral college.
I offer the simple analogy that people wanted to raise the drawbridge. In voting republican, that minority of Americans voted for their tax cut. They voted to maintain their whiteness. They voted for their own rights at the expense of others. ( minorities, women and the like )
Demographics are still going to overtake all of the above. There is nothing the can do. The only question is how much damage will be done from now until that moment happens.
You can poll any Liberal position ( even socialist ) and there are clear majorities that want those things. The problem is that no one wants to pay for them or wish to blame the wrong people when they are not implemented.
The sooner we all realize that we are in this together, the better.
I offer the simple analogy that people wanted to raise the drawbridge. In voting republican, that minority of Americans voted for their tax cut. They voted to maintain their whiteness. They voted for their own rights at the expense of others. ( minorities, women and the like )
Demographics are still going to overtake all of the above. There is nothing the can do. The only question is how much damage will be done from now until that moment happens.
You can poll any Liberal position ( even socialist ) and there are clear majorities that want those things. The problem is that no one wants to pay for them or wish to blame the wrong people when they are not implemented.
The sooner we all realize that we are in this together, the better.
24
This is nonsense. The woes that beset the lower-income white working class that voted for Trump had nothing to do with leftist over-reach.
Instead, globalization, automation, and greedy demand of US factories, farms and households for cheap, illegal immigrant labor undermined the US lower/middle class.
The White underclass needed someone to blame so they took it out on Obama and Clinton as racially and/or socially different from themselves.
Now they have a lunatic in charge of their destiny - and ours, as collateral damage.
Instead, globalization, automation, and greedy demand of US factories, farms and households for cheap, illegal immigrant labor undermined the US lower/middle class.
The White underclass needed someone to blame so they took it out on Obama and Clinton as racially and/or socially different from themselves.
Now they have a lunatic in charge of their destiny - and ours, as collateral damage.
130
Both arguments are valid: yes, working-class prosperity has been wrecked by predatory capitalism, & the political left never focused on that - never figured out how to restore economic balance. But don't blame the victims for the trap they're in. Playing the lottery with Trump is their reaction to utter despair.
5
The inauguration crowd picture here: they're all white, right?
5
Readingthis piece brought several reactions from me. One, it gave me a half a dozen books or articles to check out, even if just a cursory glance. Second, this is a bad horror/dystopian movie being played out in real time.Trump is a ghastly villain, surrounded by a cruel, manipulative cabinet of monsters bent on destroying all that is good in the nation. (maybe the world) His tools are malleable, ignorant people who really do not understand the path they have decided to travel down. From a personal perspective I don't think it had to play out this way. Unfortunately it will. Let it just be said, the bets have been placed. The bookies won't give you your money back. You can attempt to sell your bet when the deal goes bad. And third/lastly, there is a third group out there. We didn't buy the "elites" garbage of internationalism, nor did we buy the Trump/rubes reflex nationalism, "keep your hear in Merica or git your butt out" either. Now we have to watch the game play out. Bets anyone?
4
Absolutely agree with this. Immigration and SCOTUS debates are important, but will not swing elections. More time needs to be spent talking about how toxic the Republican priorities are for middle class americans. So far, the executive orders have:
- raised mortgages by $500/yr for 1.1million people
- prevented 29,000 veterans per year from being hired to federal jobs
- proposed cutting $110million in federal funding for police anti-terrorism units.
- raised mortgages by $500/yr for 1.1million people
- prevented 29,000 veterans per year from being hired to federal jobs
- proposed cutting $110million in federal funding for police anti-terrorism units.
8
Conveniently leaving out reasons for all three. Typical liberal hypocrisy.
4
First, the people that Trump says he represents are being conned and they will soon learn how big the con is, eg, dismantling ACA will result in millions losing insurance OR if Republicans replace it with some kind of voucher system people will not be able to afford premiums and deductibles. Second, the independent media must not let Trump et al change the narrative, i.e., blame liberals and Democrats, when this all comes down, and must be relentless in calling out the lies and deception.
12
Also, ACA was the biggest middle class jobs program in history, sabotaged by the red states that refused to accept medicaid expansion; that cost 80,000 jobs in FL alone. Unfortunately the Dems ran from the program in 2008 and thereafter, submitting to the Repub narrative that it is a job killer, a factual falsehood that the Dems still haven't challenged. The culture of DC has been reduced to feathering one's own nest, rather than standing up for truth and fairness. The only answer is to fire the lot of them in 2018; however, I am very doubtful that will happen.
1
DJT is delivering BIG to his voter! The elite Left (whomever that is) and the obsession for speaking for groups that don't need or particularly want the paternalism is killing the Democrats. The bungling of the DNC and the lack of foresight by policymakers on the Left is just plain crazy. Voters on the Right seem to be able to overlook the chaos that DJT has created because of their "Forgotten" status. The GOP is just starting to realize what they have lucked into and when they learn how to manage this largest of all voting groups lookout 2018 mid-term elections.
7
One small, weak ray of light in all this is that every day, day in and day out, more Republicans than Democrats die of old age, and more Democrats than Republicans turn 18. So, maybe Trump can eke out another popular-vote-loss electoral victory, but I don't think so. The folks (especially the younger voters) that thought the culture stuff was already settled will (a) come out to vote next time; and (b) not be distracted by silly 3rd party candidates.
3
This trend does not explain the many people I know who live in the Boston Metro and San Francisco Bay Area who voted for Trump. All these people have high incomes, property, manageable debt and disposable income. Some of them have disabilities and received help from Federal, State and local sources.
I'm sorry to say this about these people who I know and love, but the only thing they have in common with the Heartlanders this column focuses on is that they're white.
I'm sorry to say this about these people who I know and love, but the only thing they have in common with the Heartlanders this column focuses on is that they're white.
102
Yes, there are racists, even here in Massachusetts. I once had a perfectly ordinary guy, running his own small business, scream at me that Obama is a Muslim out to subvert this country.
They are all listening to Fox News and that ilk.
They are all listening to Fox News and that ilk.
4
I don't just think that it is white. Some of my Indian-American relatives voted for Trump. They fell into two camps. The first was issues with ACA/Obamacare and lower reimbursements for doctors. You guessed it, they were all doctors. This group was a subset of the group that voted pocketbook. They simply wanted lower taxes. That they were able to overlook the misogyny, animus to any one not white, etc... baffles and discourages me. These are highly educated folks who want for nothing. What an embarrassment!
5
Yeah, Whiteness and big prospects from tax cuts.
1
This is not populism. This is pure egotism and narcissism. Populists are interested in promoting people's interests; Trump is not. Trump has only one objective in mind - how to promote Trump.
Exhibit A - In his conversation with Australian PM Turnbull in regards refugees, he notes the size of his victory. What's up with that? This man is deranged and represents a clear and present danger to himself, his family and country.
Exhibit A - In his conversation with Australian PM Turnbull in regards refugees, he notes the size of his victory. What's up with that? This man is deranged and represents a clear and present danger to himself, his family and country.
55
What a fantastic article, so insightful. The left has allowed wealthy "limousine liberals" to take control of the party. They are out of touch with average Americans. They steer the conversation toward liberal social issues and away from pressing economic issues. It's not their pain, it's not their problem, so they ignore it. But social liberalism has been a hard recipe to follow for parents of young children and for the struggling white middle class.
The results have been clearly disastrous for the party. "The Left — as it currently exists with its toxic obsession with internationalism, multiculturalism and identity politics for everybody except the majority of people who might form its base — will simply die..." (LK)
I wonder if they will wake up in time, to save themselves. Many of us have already walked away from a rigidly self-righteous, disdainful group.
The results have been clearly disastrous for the party. "The Left — as it currently exists with its toxic obsession with internationalism, multiculturalism and identity politics for everybody except the majority of people who might form its base — will simply die..." (LK)
I wonder if they will wake up in time, to save themselves. Many of us have already walked away from a rigidly self-righteous, disdainful group.
13
But the Left has been way better on policies economically beneficial to working class Americans . The big exceptions have been avoidance of industrial policy, safety net policies targeted at those left behind by deindustrialization against which a bipartisan and mainstream economist consensus long prevailed.
So,what was (or is) the Left to do? Dive into the theory-free waters of corporatism (which has never worked in a democracywithout strong unions an employer federations)? Devise some sort of xenophobic rhetoric that doesn't alienate Hispanics and American Muslim? (Stigmstize the Chienes just when we need them to.keep North Korean nukes out of Tokyo and LA?)
So,what was (or is) the Left to do? Dive into the theory-free waters of corporatism (which has never worked in a democracywithout strong unions an employer federations)? Devise some sort of xenophobic rhetoric that doesn't alienate Hispanics and American Muslim? (Stigmstize the Chienes just when we need them to.keep North Korean nukes out of Tokyo and LA?)
2
"...Trump performed better than Romney in counties with higher drug, alcohol and suicide mortality rates.” What a perfect metaphor for American values.
Greater attention needs to be paid to the part that homophobia plays in this unfolding retrogressive disaster. Most religious people, Christians and non-Christians alike, believe homosexuality to be evil, and the imbroglio unleashed by the North Carolina bathroom bill played right into their belief that the forces of good are being overwhelmed by evil.
Greater attention needs to be paid to the part that homophobia plays in this unfolding retrogressive disaster. Most religious people, Christians and non-Christians alike, believe homosexuality to be evil, and the imbroglio unleashed by the North Carolina bathroom bill played right into their belief that the forces of good are being overwhelmed by evil.
8
this is a fascinating article.democrats may have a lot of catching up to do at this time, but time is not static and trump knows his is getting shorter. sure his immediate wins are just cocaine for the base. but most older coke users know when to stop. but this new crop of Koch users need to fall into a morass first. well they have elected a complete morass builder. just look at his history. morass after morass. the man's hubris writes morass each day till he leaves.
4
"Less-educated white Americans feel that they have become “strangers in their own land.” They see themselves as victims of affirmative action and betrayed by ‘line-cutters’ — African-Americans, immigrants, refugees and women — who jump ahead of them in the queue for the American dream. They resent liberal intellectuals who tell them to feel sorry for the line-cutters, and dismiss them as bigots when they don’t."
And where do you think they get these ideas? What jobs have they not gotten because a black neighbor or an immigrant got it -- picking fruit in a field, coding for a software company? And of course most black Americans' families have been in this country longer than Swedish, Italian, and Irish families. Why did those "less educated" white folk get jobs in the past that those black folk were equally qualified for? What led those whites to blame other poor people rather than Trumps friends in the business and financial world? Could it be that the media in general screwed up, that FOX out-foxed the NYTimes, NBC, PBS, etc.? One side in this battle over history played dirty and won. What now? Blame the losers for playing fair? Blame the misinformed people for being dupes? What we need is a heavy dose of good history -- explaining the advances in well-being and where those advances came from (labor unions, government regulation of food and drug quality, air, and water purity, Obamacare, social security, Medicare . . . ). Get with it.
And where do you think they get these ideas? What jobs have they not gotten because a black neighbor or an immigrant got it -- picking fruit in a field, coding for a software company? And of course most black Americans' families have been in this country longer than Swedish, Italian, and Irish families. Why did those "less educated" white folk get jobs in the past that those black folk were equally qualified for? What led those whites to blame other poor people rather than Trumps friends in the business and financial world? Could it be that the media in general screwed up, that FOX out-foxed the NYTimes, NBC, PBS, etc.? One side in this battle over history played dirty and won. What now? Blame the losers for playing fair? Blame the misinformed people for being dupes? What we need is a heavy dose of good history -- explaining the advances in well-being and where those advances came from (labor unions, government regulation of food and drug quality, air, and water purity, Obamacare, social security, Medicare . . . ). Get with it.
195
Fox News didn't outwit the NY Times and other reputable media outlets. Fox simply had lower moral and journalistic standards than the reputable outlets, who decided not to stoop to Fox's level, and, therefore were at a disadvantage. Fox News and hate radio listeners will simply listen to what they want to believe. Truth be damned. And isn't that just as true for Trump?
1
There is another stark data point about voters by county which would enlighten the Left/neo-liberals and that is to see what way the counties with the highest proportion of 401k's voted.
The answer will further illuminate why recovery of the stock markets since 2008 hasn't mattered as much as recovery of still-underwater home prices, and remind the elites that many counties still don't even have wide access to high speed broad-band, which elites pretty much take for granted now days.
Neo-liberals/the Left got off track when the Berlin Wall came down, and their donor class, like GOPers' donor class, no longer felt the insecurity Edsall mentions - so that just as contemplated when Treas. Sec. Nicholas Burns under St. Ronnie proposed 401k's, in the '90s, the elites and their donors were seduced by the 401k Sirens in a rising market environment which coincided with the fall of the Berlin Wall, and neo-libs thought they could market their politics the same way that Citigroup famously explained companies should operate in a plutonomy:
https://delong.typepad.com/plutonomy-1.pdf
At the same time, the peoples' representatives in D.C. became less and less representative, so that super-majorities belong to a tiny sliver of the 1%:
http://economistsview.typepad.com/economistsview/2014/01/congress-is-a-m...
leaving an unresponsive political landscape ripe for a DJT character.
The answer will further illuminate why recovery of the stock markets since 2008 hasn't mattered as much as recovery of still-underwater home prices, and remind the elites that many counties still don't even have wide access to high speed broad-band, which elites pretty much take for granted now days.
Neo-liberals/the Left got off track when the Berlin Wall came down, and their donor class, like GOPers' donor class, no longer felt the insecurity Edsall mentions - so that just as contemplated when Treas. Sec. Nicholas Burns under St. Ronnie proposed 401k's, in the '90s, the elites and their donors were seduced by the 401k Sirens in a rising market environment which coincided with the fall of the Berlin Wall, and neo-libs thought they could market their politics the same way that Citigroup famously explained companies should operate in a plutonomy:
https://delong.typepad.com/plutonomy-1.pdf
At the same time, the peoples' representatives in D.C. became less and less representative, so that super-majorities belong to a tiny sliver of the 1%:
http://economistsview.typepad.com/economistsview/2014/01/congress-is-a-m...
leaving an unresponsive political landscape ripe for a DJT character.
12
Apologies; Treasury Secretary under St. Ronnie should read Donald Regan.
4
There are two unpatriotic establishments that do not value Jacksonian America. The cultural establishment is not concerned with the economics of the downwardly-mobile working class, and mocks this class and its values culturally. The economic establishment is concerned with the economics of the downwardly-mobile working class, and likes the cheap and docile labor force thus produced. If the cultural establishment is unpatriotic because of multinationalism, the economic establishment is unpatriotic because of single-minded pursuit of profit and the best deal.
The working class has managed to put down the cultural establishment, but the economic establishment now rules as never before in recent history, fronted by a ruthless businessman who pretends to be for workers and does individual publicity stunts to prove it. In order to gain credibility with the working class, the cultural establishment must explicitly take on the economic establishment and its favoring of economic inequality as a way to get cheap and docile labor. This probably means that the cultural establishment must support raising its own taxes, or at least taxes on celebrities.
The working class has managed to put down the cultural establishment, but the economic establishment now rules as never before in recent history, fronted by a ruthless businessman who pretends to be for workers and does individual publicity stunts to prove it. In order to gain credibility with the working class, the cultural establishment must explicitly take on the economic establishment and its favoring of economic inequality as a way to get cheap and docile labor. This probably means that the cultural establishment must support raising its own taxes, or at least taxes on celebrities.
104
The cultural class is dominated by the media--highly aligned with corporatist interests, lock-step advocates for their illegitimate world view, disguisers of its oppression and carnage, eager receivers of corporate bunce--that will not change soon, if ever; certainly not before it's too late to be in the vanguard.
21
I don't see mockery of the middle class by the cultural establishment. I see statements like that and can't figure out the identity of anyone who is a member of the cultural establishment? I don't think we have a cultural establishment. We may have cultural trendsetters but they are too busy being trendsetters to mock anyone. But I do resent an old white man telling me that I must have a baby because the old man said so. By cultural establishment do you mean Pro choice? And btw celebrities pay hefty taxes which are being sent to the Deep South and flyover country. If politicians in those areas gave a whit about their states that wouldn't be happening. So who is mocking whom? My bet it's Bannon and Trump.
97
I agree except am not sure the working class is winning the culture war, unfortunately.
1
Times readers may note a communication technique called compression, the use of a summary term to condense a big, emotionally important idea so it resonances widely and is accepted on its face. Examples: "reverse discrimination," "Islamic terrorism," and now, "security.") Compression works because it skips facts to rely on emotion. Trump takes its shorthand a step further: horrible/fail/mess/loser/dishonest/incredible are frequent flyers. He erases any underlying fact-basis to substitute a replacement reality. The replacement is vindicated by repeating compressions ("lock her up" presumes guilt without describing the details of crimes).
This technique is the power in Trump's language, but it hides inadequacies: a poverty of dependability, an exiguity in avoiding conflicts/disruptions. His model of advancement through opposition/straw men--as readers know, soon or later, collapses under its on stress.
His "resistance" cannot be compressed! It reached 800 cities in 80 countries (Cape Town, Bangkok, Wellington) in women-led rallies the day after his swearing-in, the largest in history! Trump is an international danger to many, despite winning by losing America's popular vote.
Post-materialism, a compression, is ridiculed with logic flaws. Its dialectics miss change's sharp edge: the age of excess! An excess of capital wealth produces waste (neither Left nor Right!); its contradiction overwhelms its greed. Trump and social chaos are by-products; both hide failing flaws.
This technique is the power in Trump's language, but it hides inadequacies: a poverty of dependability, an exiguity in avoiding conflicts/disruptions. His model of advancement through opposition/straw men--as readers know, soon or later, collapses under its on stress.
His "resistance" cannot be compressed! It reached 800 cities in 80 countries (Cape Town, Bangkok, Wellington) in women-led rallies the day after his swearing-in, the largest in history! Trump is an international danger to many, despite winning by losing America's popular vote.
Post-materialism, a compression, is ridiculed with logic flaws. Its dialectics miss change's sharp edge: the age of excess! An excess of capital wealth produces waste (neither Left nor Right!); its contradiction overwhelms its greed. Trump and social chaos are by-products; both hide failing flaws.
200
Both of yours were pretty good. Keep up the good work.
1
As the wreckage grows from the Trump-Bannon administration, a significant number of Trump voters will become disillusioned. Trump's approval rating is already at a historic low for a president at the start of his term.
Millions of Trump voters voted not once, but twice for Obama before finally turning to Trump. They will become ripe for recruiting back into the Democrat column in 2018.
Democrats have a real chance of winning back one or both houses of Congress in 2018. To do so, they they must forgo their usual dismissive and damning attitude towards the white working-class, and instead welcome them back with open arms.
This will be quite a challenge for liberal Democrats, who's reflexive response to
any adversity is to blame and scold. Their need to blame is so heavy an affliction for liberal Democrats that it renders them unable to pursue effective political strategies. In effect, they are "blame lame."
They simply must turn over a new leaf, and keep their eyes on the prize, which is electoral victory in 2018. The choice before them is that or fascism.
Millions of Trump voters voted not once, but twice for Obama before finally turning to Trump. They will become ripe for recruiting back into the Democrat column in 2018.
Democrats have a real chance of winning back one or both houses of Congress in 2018. To do so, they they must forgo their usual dismissive and damning attitude towards the white working-class, and instead welcome them back with open arms.
This will be quite a challenge for liberal Democrats, who's reflexive response to
any adversity is to blame and scold. Their need to blame is so heavy an affliction for liberal Democrats that it renders them unable to pursue effective political strategies. In effect, they are "blame lame."
They simply must turn over a new leaf, and keep their eyes on the prize, which is electoral victory in 2018. The choice before them is that or fascism.
231
2018 depends on how fast the Obama, then Trump voter expects anything. It also depends on Congress. A good example is healthcare for sick and retired coal miners. The GOP opposes it, of course, Democrats support it, of course and coal country is counting on a job bonanza so they may be patient. As for the ACA repeal, if people bought policies, they are okay for a year unless insurance companies just start canceling existing policies. Anything is possible under a free market.
There's an expression "caveat emptor," which means "let the buyer beware." Now the expression should be "let the voter beware." One thing for sure under the Trump administration. No one is gonna protect you from economic disaster. Cuts to food stamps, Medicaid, Medicare are coming. And we will see how many American based manufacturing companies abandon their foreign billion dollar state of the art factories, to build something here to avoid an import tax they can pass on to Walmart shoppers.
There's an expression "caveat emptor," which means "let the buyer beware." Now the expression should be "let the voter beware." One thing for sure under the Trump administration. No one is gonna protect you from economic disaster. Cuts to food stamps, Medicaid, Medicare are coming. And we will see how many American based manufacturing companies abandon their foreign billion dollar state of the art factories, to build something here to avoid an import tax they can pass on to Walmart shoppers.
57
Give some examples, please, of how you see liberal democrats "blaming and scolding" as you write above...I am trying to understand.
3
I beg to differ.
The Left will never get over its scolding of all who disagree not just with its points but with its actions. When you walk the dog and get scolded because some Lefty thinks the money spent should have gone to the poor. When you buy the wrong car, the wrong house, send your child to the wrong school or God forbid home school. If one goes to church and actually is a believer that's to be criticized. If it happens to be Roman Catholic or traditional Protestant then you get scolded because there are no women pastors, don't support abortion. Even a life of self sufficiency is to be condemned
Democrat chances of taking back the Congress are slim to none in 2018. They have too many positions to defend in comparison to the Republicans. In play are the states Trump won that have not been in the Republican slot for a decade or more. You cannot ignore the "protests" where there is property damage and disruption of process. No matter the issue the images of people walking around with baseball bats smashing windows is difficult to ignore especially when contrasted with Conservative rallies where the are is spotless with no soda cans and placards left on the ground. Throw in defecating on a police car, obscene sayings on those placards, public sex, open drug use and unsanitary venues and you can that the Left s its own enemy. Make sure the Illegals carry Mexican flags and curse the US.
You've 40 years of bad imaging to clean up.
The Left will never get over its scolding of all who disagree not just with its points but with its actions. When you walk the dog and get scolded because some Lefty thinks the money spent should have gone to the poor. When you buy the wrong car, the wrong house, send your child to the wrong school or God forbid home school. If one goes to church and actually is a believer that's to be criticized. If it happens to be Roman Catholic or traditional Protestant then you get scolded because there are no women pastors, don't support abortion. Even a life of self sufficiency is to be condemned
Democrat chances of taking back the Congress are slim to none in 2018. They have too many positions to defend in comparison to the Republicans. In play are the states Trump won that have not been in the Republican slot for a decade or more. You cannot ignore the "protests" where there is property damage and disruption of process. No matter the issue the images of people walking around with baseball bats smashing windows is difficult to ignore especially when contrasted with Conservative rallies where the are is spotless with no soda cans and placards left on the ground. Throw in defecating on a police car, obscene sayings on those placards, public sex, open drug use and unsanitary venues and you can that the Left s its own enemy. Make sure the Illegals carry Mexican flags and curse the US.
You've 40 years of bad imaging to clean up.
7
A Letter from Alexander Hamilton to the Considerate Citizens of New-York On the Politics of the Day (New York, 1784).