Trump's working class warriors so far:
Chief of Staff Priebus: GOP elitist/establishment
Strategic Advisor Bannon: Neo Nazi enabler (at least)
Attorney General Sessions: Racist member of GOP establishmHUD Secretary Carson: Neurosurgeon with no knowledge/experience who opposes housing discrimination laws
UN Ambassador Haley: Governor with zero foreign policy experience
Commerce Secretary: Billionaire who scavenged for bankrupt companies
Leading candidate for Treasury is a Wall Street billionaire.
Leading candidates for State: Vulture capitalist Mitt "47% of Americans just want free stuff" Romney and rabid dog Guiliani with no foreign policy experience whatsoever.
Education Secretary DeVos: Billionaire ideologue supporter of vouchers who became wealthy via the Amway pyramid scheme and has no experience as an educator.
More to come, so maybe maybe Labor Secretary will be a.......well, most likely a lobbyist for corporate interests.
Chief of Staff Priebus: GOP elitist/establishment
Strategic Advisor Bannon: Neo Nazi enabler (at least)
Attorney General Sessions: Racist member of GOP establishmHUD Secretary Carson: Neurosurgeon with no knowledge/experience who opposes housing discrimination laws
UN Ambassador Haley: Governor with zero foreign policy experience
Commerce Secretary: Billionaire who scavenged for bankrupt companies
Leading candidate for Treasury is a Wall Street billionaire.
Leading candidates for State: Vulture capitalist Mitt "47% of Americans just want free stuff" Romney and rabid dog Guiliani with no foreign policy experience whatsoever.
Education Secretary DeVos: Billionaire ideologue supporter of vouchers who became wealthy via the Amway pyramid scheme and has no experience as an educator.
More to come, so maybe maybe Labor Secretary will be a.......well, most likely a lobbyist for corporate interests.
131
Paul...travel west to Ohio and western Pa. and talk to people. Be a reporter. You may actually learn something.
122
Paul is like the merchant captain of the ill-fated ship, HMS Identity Politics, who is constantly surveying his outer surroundings with the limited view afforded by his telescope, meanwhile the pirates are fast heading broadside.
64
Don't worry Middle America, the Palm Beach Populist is here !
He only lives on the coast and mixes with the elite to get intelligence on them.
Anyone else notice how well fed these "poor Americans" at Trump rallies look ?
He only lives on the coast and mixes with the elite to get intelligence on them.
Anyone else notice how well fed these "poor Americans" at Trump rallies look ?
79
You are missing the point. The points that you make, from a policy standpoint, are valid. But think about the rise of Bernie Sanders as compared to HIllary Clinton. You can't be calling on the Wall St. banks, and taking their money and that of the other big millionaires and billionaires, and say you are really for the working class. I've always thought that Obama naming Tim Geithner as the Secretary of the Treasury was a payoff, and, surprise, surprise, Geither stopped every attempt at a prosecution of a Wall St. insider. Hillary represented the status quo, and Bernie / Trump represented change. My logic for voting for Hillary, was: I couldn't see a know-nothing, slime-bag as the leader of the free world, and still can't. Hillary wasn't going to change anything, and Trump is going to make things worse for the working class. No surprise there. Most of the people that voted for him are smart and voting for their pocketbook interests. They hoped and hope that Donald will in fact do something for them. Obviously, we'll see what he does. Naming billionaires and incompetents like Ben Carson as Secretary of HUD isn't going to make things better. To even think that his son-in-law is going to solve or even help solve the Israeli / Palestinian standoff, is beyond chutzpah. Maybe he'll throw in some of Ivanka's jewelry to sweeten the deal. Obviously, that's what the Israeli's and Palestinians have been waiting for.
132
The voting public? worried the hell out of Adams, Washington, Hamilton
and many others......they worried about just this moment in time......
God help us.
If any trump voter really wants to know what they got....read
the interview he just had with the NY Times.....
then read the Gettysburg Address, The farewell to the troops,
FDR...Dec. 7th a day that will live in infamy......
Nov. 8th another day that will live in infamy........
and many others......they worried about just this moment in time......
God help us.
If any trump voter really wants to know what they got....read
the interview he just had with the NY Times.....
then read the Gettysburg Address, The farewell to the troops,
FDR...Dec. 7th a day that will live in infamy......
Nov. 8th another day that will live in infamy........
84
Judge David Souter explained this very well in a video segment aired on Rachel Maddow. He called it "Pervasive Civic Ignorance". Basically a lack of understanding about how government works leads to a population who don't know who to "blame" when things don't go their way. Because of this they are ripe for being co-opted by demagogues. This video is worth watching and sharing: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=qyxawIuqbjM
201
I used to come here to get inspiration and understanding because Paul Krugmann has always been very open minded and sharp in the past about what ails the nation economically but like Obama with his misguided attempt to push TTiP he and the NYT decided that being an investigative newspaper was out and being the DNC 's propaganda mouth piece was in so now all we get is this guff, whataboutery and total confusion.
You sold out Paul, you and others I once respected like Charles M Blow who sold your soul for a crook who despite fighting her image as a crook had her husband meet the prosecuting judge (AG) for a 'private meeting' in true Godfather style.
Her rehiring Debbie Wasserman Schultz 24 hours after being forced to fire here after the now demonized wikileaks, doing their job (and duty) to inform us of the facts while this media now act as attack dogs against the very sources of information that once gave them Pulitzers (UK Guardian and Washington Post) and betray their very own sources.
Your mindless, bigoted and scary embrace of neo McCarthyism where 'everything is Russia's fault' and 'Putin is Hitler' (really?)? Where EVERYONE is to blame except the arrogant 'we decide who the next POTUS is' BEFORE the election DNC who decided this time to not allow another Obama (Sanders) the chance to win democratically.
According to you lot the election was stolen from Hillary by; 'bigoted white men', stupid women, pitiful millenials, lazy colored folk, the FBI, Putin ...
STOP!
You sold out Paul, you and others I once respected like Charles M Blow who sold your soul for a crook who despite fighting her image as a crook had her husband meet the prosecuting judge (AG) for a 'private meeting' in true Godfather style.
Her rehiring Debbie Wasserman Schultz 24 hours after being forced to fire here after the now demonized wikileaks, doing their job (and duty) to inform us of the facts while this media now act as attack dogs against the very sources of information that once gave them Pulitzers (UK Guardian and Washington Post) and betray their very own sources.
Your mindless, bigoted and scary embrace of neo McCarthyism where 'everything is Russia's fault' and 'Putin is Hitler' (really?)? Where EVERYONE is to blame except the arrogant 'we decide who the next POTUS is' BEFORE the election DNC who decided this time to not allow another Obama (Sanders) the chance to win democratically.
According to you lot the election was stolen from Hillary by; 'bigoted white men', stupid women, pitiful millenials, lazy colored folk, the FBI, Putin ...
STOP!
127
It's Magical Thinking ...... simple "answers" to complex questions. Real answers, or the uncertainty of no clear answers, dismay and frighten. Voting for Mr. Trump when your stocking is empty is like voting for Santa -just less effective.
68
Message has a lot less value than the messenger. That's how Donald Trump
managed to secure the Electoral College plurality.
He has something others didn't have, charisma & strength. With that he effortlessly sent all 16 other Republican contenders packing despite his phenomenal flaws. He's highly impulsive, restless, doesn't sleep much and lashes out at others at the slightest slights, all the characteristics of HYPOMANIC. But his supporters were enamored by his charm, mesmerized by his reassuring words, though they didn't actually believe in most of what he said. They just wanted him to be THEIR PRESIDENT, not unlike people wanted Ronald Reagan to be their president.
Reagan was stable, normal and wouldn't get rattled by small things. He had character, but he was as conservative as they come; didn't mind shrinking safety net programs, as much as "feasible." (One reason why conservatives disliked Trump was they thought he was for liberal programs, even for single-payer healthcare and hiking taxes on the rich.)
With the same same assets of his personality, Trump beat the formidable Hillary Clinton. Clinton is not likable, which turned out to be an insurmountable flaw. Her exceptional competence and hard work didn't get her through. Her fear of admitting a mistake & to apologize were also decisive.
Trump may not do what said he would do. Cooler heads may prevail. No guarantee. The next several several yrs are trying time for, even humanity!
managed to secure the Electoral College plurality.
He has something others didn't have, charisma & strength. With that he effortlessly sent all 16 other Republican contenders packing despite his phenomenal flaws. He's highly impulsive, restless, doesn't sleep much and lashes out at others at the slightest slights, all the characteristics of HYPOMANIC. But his supporters were enamored by his charm, mesmerized by his reassuring words, though they didn't actually believe in most of what he said. They just wanted him to be THEIR PRESIDENT, not unlike people wanted Ronald Reagan to be their president.
Reagan was stable, normal and wouldn't get rattled by small things. He had character, but he was as conservative as they come; didn't mind shrinking safety net programs, as much as "feasible." (One reason why conservatives disliked Trump was they thought he was for liberal programs, even for single-payer healthcare and hiking taxes on the rich.)
With the same same assets of his personality, Trump beat the formidable Hillary Clinton. Clinton is not likable, which turned out to be an insurmountable flaw. Her exceptional competence and hard work didn't get her through. Her fear of admitting a mistake & to apologize were also decisive.
Trump may not do what said he would do. Cooler heads may prevail. No guarantee. The next several several yrs are trying time for, even humanity!
30
Read Arlie Russell Hochshild's book, Strangers in Their Own Land.
21
Brilliant
16
Maybe, just maybe, the white working class got a little tired of a candidate who parlayed public service into a $100 million+ personal fortune and spent all of her campaign time on $50,000 a plate hob nobs with the liberal elite in New York City, Hollywood and Martha's Vineyard while publicly proclaiming 'I've got your back!' Really, the white working class isn't THAT stupid. Leave it to the Democrats to put up a worse candidate than Donald Trump. Seriously, who could possibly lose to Donald Trump?
128
Descend from your ivory tower and go talk to people.
62
Why? Read "What's The Matter With Kansas" ...why people (e.g., Kansas et al,) vote against their (economic) self interest...
33
Of course Paul, once you've splained to them how they really don't know what's good for them and that you do, why wouldn't they amend their hillbilly ways? A real mystery, indeed.
54
Its funny to watch and read the desperation of the NYT opinion writers like Blow and Krugman, along with the echo chamber comments here.
They are frustrated that the NYT and the MSM can no longer control the narrative. Their editorials go unread or are mocked by most Americans. When they talk down to people and call them "deplorables", Americans wear it as a badge of honor.
While I don't agree with many of Trumps positions, and certainly find him distasteful, seeing him bring queen Hillary and the MSM to heel is massively satisfying.
Go on Dr. Krugman - keep on talking down to Americans. They will see you at the polls, let by Trump or any other plain talking American that comes along.
They are frustrated that the NYT and the MSM can no longer control the narrative. Their editorials go unread or are mocked by most Americans. When they talk down to people and call them "deplorables", Americans wear it as a badge of honor.
While I don't agree with many of Trumps positions, and certainly find him distasteful, seeing him bring queen Hillary and the MSM to heel is massively satisfying.
Go on Dr. Krugman - keep on talking down to Americans. They will see you at the polls, let by Trump or any other plain talking American that comes along.
68
Paul,
You put your finger on it. Stoking white resentment makes folks blind to the impact of their votes for a party that is opposed to their very specific needs and interests, to wit; Social Security, Medicare and health insurance.
Bob Dan spoke to this issue decades ago with the song, "Only a Pawn in Their Game".
Divide and conquer with race as the bait......
You put your finger on it. Stoking white resentment makes folks blind to the impact of their votes for a party that is opposed to their very specific needs and interests, to wit; Social Security, Medicare and health insurance.
Bob Dan spoke to this issue decades ago with the song, "Only a Pawn in Their Game".
Divide and conquer with race as the bait......
38
Trump slogan in 2020 campaign: 4 more years and we will bring back coal; get women off your back; hire the deposed Putin as SecState and... and...and... make America great again.
That is it unless he gets impeached for making Trump Tower (any location) the new White House.
That is it unless he gets impeached for making Trump Tower (any location) the new White House.
28
Read Hillbilly Elegy by JD Vance...
25
Paul, you will never get it. Sanders would have won this election easily.
70
If Trump really wants to pretend he show he cares to want diversity around him, he should drop his orthodox son-in-law and take a look at Bernie. Donald, try not to think about that idea as oil and water, but rather a vinegrette. I'm sure you've had that at 21 Club, so you know that it tastes good.
10
This is a demographic that can't shrink fast enough.
38
"To be honest, I don’t fully understand this resentment"
So in other words Mr.Krugman, you have no answers at all. You are perplexed, just like your liberal pals. You learned nothing.
So in other words Mr.Krugman, you have no answers at all. You are perplexed, just like your liberal pals. You learned nothing.
66
white supremacy, misogyny and hate brought dRumpft to power. You can't teach a hateful imbecile, it just can't happen. They were raised on hate, hate is not innate.
33
..."whom they imagine look down on them."
Use of "they imagine" here is comical. Stick to economic analysis, PK.
Use of "they imagine" here is comical. Stick to economic analysis, PK.
38
The DNC was to Flyover Country, as Beyonce was to the Country Music Awards. Impressive perhaps, but something from New York that is out of touch and "other."
Of course Krugman doesn't understand. He is "thinking it" from inside the bubble of the comfortable and secure.
Bernie felt it; Hillary thought it; Trump used it.
Of course Krugman doesn't understand. He is "thinking it" from inside the bubble of the comfortable and secure.
Bernie felt it; Hillary thought it; Trump used it.
40
"But is there any reason to believe that this would work? Let me offer some reasons for doubt."
Yes it would work. Let me offer some reasons to affirm it:
I actually talk to people rather than staring at spreadsheets and PDFs trying to squeeze complex human issues out of garbage "data".
"Any claim that changed policy positions will win elections assumes that the public will hear about those positions."
Yeah, they will, if you actually have a candidate who believes in these things who can inspire an army of grassroots volunteers and activists to ... yes!! TALK TO PEOPLE! But they won't hear about them if you spend $50 million or whatever on negative ads in Florida about how Donald Trump says really bad things (because that's not self-evident or anything), causing people to -completely tune you out-.
You would think that the election of Donald Trump would be sufficient to pierce the Beltway Bubble. Apparently not.
I guess it's war, then. It's funny how when the establishment wins, everyone has to sit down, shut up, and fall in line. But when they deliver their Party a resounding defeat they seem to have a little trouble doing that themselves.
Yes it would work. Let me offer some reasons to affirm it:
I actually talk to people rather than staring at spreadsheets and PDFs trying to squeeze complex human issues out of garbage "data".
"Any claim that changed policy positions will win elections assumes that the public will hear about those positions."
Yeah, they will, if you actually have a candidate who believes in these things who can inspire an army of grassroots volunteers and activists to ... yes!! TALK TO PEOPLE! But they won't hear about them if you spend $50 million or whatever on negative ads in Florida about how Donald Trump says really bad things (because that's not self-evident or anything), causing people to -completely tune you out-.
You would think that the election of Donald Trump would be sufficient to pierce the Beltway Bubble. Apparently not.
I guess it's war, then. It's funny how when the establishment wins, everyone has to sit down, shut up, and fall in line. But when they deliver their Party a resounding defeat they seem to have a little trouble doing that themselves.
37
Identity politics, and the METHODOLOGY utilized to propagate and force a point of view, was a major factor in Clinton's loss.
You state that with respect to resentment of identity politics, you don't understand it: "To be honest, I don’t fully understand this resentment." You point to Comey's FBI as laying a 'heavy thumb on the scales', yet you ignore the verdict against Rolling Stones false 'rape story' as being an issue. Or the fact that the Supreme Court would hear the NC Transgender bathroom case, or the case of "Memories Pizza".
Perhaps we can 'follow the money' to gain an understanding of a national discontent with the left. Memories Pizza in Indiana was attacked after during the Indiana RFRA debates. Hysteria was created by advocacy groups on the left, claims of bigots easily thrown around. A dubious reporting segment stated that "memories pizza was the first to deny service to a (hypothetical) gay wedding". The owners were attacked as 'bigots' and had to shut their store. Here's were the money comes in: a crowd funding site raised over $800,000 in 48 hours for Memories Pizza, far exceeding its $200k goal. Out of anger, the left started its own campaign to raise $1 million, to show bigots that "Love Wins". They failed to reach their goal even after 30 days and eventually shut it down.
This is not a case of "bigotry", more of question of fairness and the demagoguery of the left with relation to identity politics.
You state that with respect to resentment of identity politics, you don't understand it: "To be honest, I don’t fully understand this resentment." You point to Comey's FBI as laying a 'heavy thumb on the scales', yet you ignore the verdict against Rolling Stones false 'rape story' as being an issue. Or the fact that the Supreme Court would hear the NC Transgender bathroom case, or the case of "Memories Pizza".
Perhaps we can 'follow the money' to gain an understanding of a national discontent with the left. Memories Pizza in Indiana was attacked after during the Indiana RFRA debates. Hysteria was created by advocacy groups on the left, claims of bigots easily thrown around. A dubious reporting segment stated that "memories pizza was the first to deny service to a (hypothetical) gay wedding". The owners were attacked as 'bigots' and had to shut their store. Here's were the money comes in: a crowd funding site raised over $800,000 in 48 hours for Memories Pizza, far exceeding its $200k goal. Out of anger, the left started its own campaign to raise $1 million, to show bigots that "Love Wins". They failed to reach their goal even after 30 days and eventually shut it down.
This is not a case of "bigotry", more of question of fairness and the demagoguery of the left with relation to identity politics.
23
America voted for a monster.
Now, Trump tells he's a nice guy.
American voted for a torturer.
Now, Trump tells us he won't torture.
America voted to "lock her up."
Now, Trump tells us he won't.
America voted to build a wall.
Now, Trump tells us that was just rhetoric.
America voted for a liar.
At least Trump was honest about that.
Now, Trump tells he's a nice guy.
American voted for a torturer.
Now, Trump tells us he won't torture.
America voted to "lock her up."
Now, Trump tells us he won't.
America voted to build a wall.
Now, Trump tells us that was just rhetoric.
America voted for a liar.
At least Trump was honest about that.
46
Even though I know compassion is asking too much, here is a link to more on this tp[ic: http://www.slate.com/blogs/moneybox/2016/11/23/suicide_rates_rose_in_com...
5
Paul, it's simple. In a media-driven age, you need a media-genic candidate to win. Nobody gets fired up about issues. They vote for the candidate that fires them up. Period. W., Obama, Trump-- they got votes by connecting with folks.
27
All the political strategizing and intellectual discourse is useless. Donald Trump struck a chord with the ...... deplorables. Yes, Hillary was right. She should never have apologized or tried to explain it away. Racism, sexism, misogyny, mock the disabled, anti-immigrant, anti-Muslim, anti Obama - whose eight year presidency was simply too much for disgruntled whites. These whites voted against Hillary because Obama campaigned for her and said "ensure my legacy." He campaigned as if it were his third term. That was the nail in the coffin for Hillary. It's not the economy, folks.
34
Excellent piece again, however: lets extend your mission to not only explain this to largely the convicted. Instead what can you and the NYT conduit do to convince the people in Kentucky of this point, the ones who you are also intending to speak to or convince, I assume. It is their plight you are speaking of.
This must be frustrating?
This must be frustrating?
3
You've hit the nail on the head as usual. It's so depressing seeing people work against their own interests.
20
Bernie Sanders appealed to many Trump voters not only because he spoke about inequality in a way they understood and agreed with, but because they knew he was an "outsider" to the both the Democratic and Republican party.
36
How did FDR win the white working class? Conditions at the time were ripe for a demagogue.
12
I used to be a great fan of yours. But 2016 has been a big disappointment for me. First, you decided to back Hillary Clinton, come what may. Second, you dissed Bernie Saunders from the beginning without giving his policies the light of day. And now, even after the Democratic Party establishment managed to bury Sanders and elect Trump, you still find reason to dismiss his analysis of what might be done to regain white working class voters, many of whom who moved from him to Trump. First, you should recognize how his policy positions garnered way more votes than expected in the primaries -- which he might have won if the DNC, the NYTimes, and latent anti-Semitism made it seem impossible.
In today's column, you said those clueless Kentucky voters weren't interested in policy but only in "resentment." Well, where do you think resentment comes from? It's not an enjoyable emotion. It comes from neglect and a sense of powerlessness, just what happened to them during the Obama administration (not entirely his fault) and Hillary Clinton's campaign. Why not shift your analytical skills, when it comes to American politics, to actual policy positions to the left of Secretary Clinton and recognize how much she was connected to a socio-economic-pc-class that didn't connect to the white working class? If you reorient your political coordinates to where they were before you jumped on the Clinton bandwagon, you might resume the your previous prescient commentary.
In today's column, you said those clueless Kentucky voters weren't interested in policy but only in "resentment." Well, where do you think resentment comes from? It's not an enjoyable emotion. It comes from neglect and a sense of powerlessness, just what happened to them during the Obama administration (not entirely his fault) and Hillary Clinton's campaign. Why not shift your analytical skills, when it comes to American politics, to actual policy positions to the left of Secretary Clinton and recognize how much she was connected to a socio-economic-pc-class that didn't connect to the white working class? If you reorient your political coordinates to where they were before you jumped on the Clinton bandwagon, you might resume the your previous prescient commentary.
43
Paul, it's plain and simple as the nose on your face --- you put up a flawed candidate --- a 30-year flawed candidate whose bank account grew, while our's has shrunk, repeatedly. It's the pocketbook! She was caught in lie after lie --- the newspaper you work for, once called her a "congenital liar". She should have been gone, then, not so much for the lying, but for not standing her ground and calling out the setup. When I look back and people talk about Watergate and whatnot --- as far as I'm concerned, the most disgusting night of our lives will be Clinton and the cigar question on prime time. (And no one pitching a fit!) I think the Republicans managed to make the fight about her, she turned inward, always playing it safe, but losing sight of the people overall. Because she was always defending herself, no one could believe she would defend them. She won, we lost, and you forgot, you can't sell ice to Eskimos.
26
Thank you Dr. Krugman for articulating this incredibly frustrating and perplexing situation.
14
Sentiment overran the technicals and the political marketplace invested in a takeover junk bond.
14
Somewhere around 2003 Thomas Frank wrote, "What's the matter With Kansas?" and Mr. Krugman's column shows that he has not learned anything since then.
People in Kansas and West Virginia do not want the largess of the government as a replacement for the chance to provide for their families. Is that really so hard to see? The concept of Dignity may not be well understood in the rarified air of the NYT newsroom, but it is in Clay County.
The condescension of the elite left seeps throughout this column, example: "what voters see as favoritism ..(even though it isn't) and anger on the part of the less educated at liberal elites whom they IMAGINE (emphasis added) look down on them." Imagine? C'mon, man. You can cut the scorn with a knife.
Paul, read 'What's the Matter with Kansas." Learn something.
Oh, and one final thing. These people are the rock of America, the ones who built the nation and settled the west. They are the families who send their children off to defend the nation in the Armed Services. Even though they do not have as much money or as many Masters degrees, we in the coastal bubbles should realize that these God-fearing and moral people are better than us, and be thankful that they continue to form the bedrock of our nation, despite the chronic contempt they feel from us.
People in Kansas and West Virginia do not want the largess of the government as a replacement for the chance to provide for their families. Is that really so hard to see? The concept of Dignity may not be well understood in the rarified air of the NYT newsroom, but it is in Clay County.
The condescension of the elite left seeps throughout this column, example: "what voters see as favoritism ..(even though it isn't) and anger on the part of the less educated at liberal elites whom they IMAGINE (emphasis added) look down on them." Imagine? C'mon, man. You can cut the scorn with a knife.
Paul, read 'What's the Matter with Kansas." Learn something.
Oh, and one final thing. These people are the rock of America, the ones who built the nation and settled the west. They are the families who send their children off to defend the nation in the Armed Services. Even though they do not have as much money or as many Masters degrees, we in the coastal bubbles should realize that these God-fearing and moral people are better than us, and be thankful that they continue to form the bedrock of our nation, despite the chronic contempt they feel from us.
34
How about a 'chaos' theory:
Trump's picks already point to a chaotic administration, with outliers pursuing each their narrow personal ideologies. How could it be different, when he has alienated the pool of reasonable potential candidates to the top jobs? Despite my usually optimistic outlook with regards to the US, I can't imagine that out of this fundamental incoherence would emerge anything other than wild improvisations, like:
- OK, reduce the taxes for the rich and trumpet a huge infrastructure drive (with even more tax breaks for the lucky bidders) and then.. watch how the chips will fall, and hope for the best?
- Make a deal with Putin... and everything will fall in place in the Middle-East?
- Create more privilege with wholesale school vouchers... and Americans will finally emerge from their dangerous lagging in educational achievements?
- Etc...
Trump's picks already point to a chaotic administration, with outliers pursuing each their narrow personal ideologies. How could it be different, when he has alienated the pool of reasonable potential candidates to the top jobs? Despite my usually optimistic outlook with regards to the US, I can't imagine that out of this fundamental incoherence would emerge anything other than wild improvisations, like:
- OK, reduce the taxes for the rich and trumpet a huge infrastructure drive (with even more tax breaks for the lucky bidders) and then.. watch how the chips will fall, and hope for the best?
- Make a deal with Putin... and everything will fall in place in the Middle-East?
- Create more privilege with wholesale school vouchers... and Americans will finally emerge from their dangerous lagging in educational achievements?
- Etc...
14
"One can never underestimate the intelligence of The American voter." Kelly Ann Conway was the only one who read H.L. Mencken.
28
For all of you Bernie cultists...what makes you so sure that the non progressive base-we evil "elites"--would have shown up for him? Why did so many progressive senate candidates lose by larger margins than Clinton? You seem incapable of listening to working class whites and the other half of the Democratic Party. Go ask some folks in Wisconsin if they would have voted for Bernie. From the exit research I've seen, the answer is no. They don't want free stuff.
19
Mrs. Clinton shouda, woulda, coulda. How sad to see a mind as good as Dr. Krugman's come up with such puerile arguments. Hello, the electoral college rules have been in force for 240 years; who besides apologists care about the "popular vote"? As to Mr. Comey's complicity, who was the genius who rejected her own staff's advice and used a server in her home for official emails?
I don't know why Clay County, Kentucky, gave Mr. Trump 87% of its vote, despite the largesse Dr. Krugman claims the county received from the Obama administration. If I was Dr. Krugman, I would travel there and ask. I postulate that they want jobs, not handouts from a Democratic administration.
I don't know why Clay County, Kentucky, gave Mr. Trump 87% of its vote, despite the largesse Dr. Krugman claims the county received from the Obama administration. If I was Dr. Krugman, I would travel there and ask. I postulate that they want jobs, not handouts from a Democratic administration.
37
I think you nailed it. Which means we could be our own worst enemy.
Every coastal liberal I know relishes being able to pick fun at those who support Trump. They'd rather pick at, point fingers at, make fun of, Trump and his supporters, than say anything positive about Clinton or any other Democrat.
What do coastal people call the middle of the country? Fly-over country.
We're not going to reach people if we're too busy sneering at them.
On the other hand, I think we'll gain a lot of we focus on highlighting the negative consequences of a Trump Administration, as well as state administrations led by extremist Republicans. And it doesn't hurt to highlight positive events and activities in the rust belt, coal country, the south, etc. Acknowledge good programs and people.
Every coastal liberal I know relishes being able to pick fun at those who support Trump. They'd rather pick at, point fingers at, make fun of, Trump and his supporters, than say anything positive about Clinton or any other Democrat.
What do coastal people call the middle of the country? Fly-over country.
We're not going to reach people if we're too busy sneering at them.
On the other hand, I think we'll gain a lot of we focus on highlighting the negative consequences of a Trump Administration, as well as state administrations led by extremist Republicans. And it doesn't hurt to highlight positive events and activities in the rust belt, coal country, the south, etc. Acknowledge good programs and people.
9
Americans are not attuned to the service culture. Many may be wage slaves, but they want the pride that attends laboring in the manufacturing & extraction industries. Dismiss them at our electoral peril. Bernie Sanders is right.
22
You're asking the wrong question. "White Working Class" is just a politically correct euphemism for men who believe in white male supremacy, which was less common when Unions were strong and bound together various social groups, and bigotry was something to be ashamed about, not proud of.
This election was dominated by old white men in media and electioneering, who refuse to be ordered around to benefit a woman. A black man was definitely the last straw, a step too far, and no female could be allowed to be next. Not in their lifetimes. Never surrender.
Hillary should have been the nominee in 2008, and Barack this year.
This election was dominated by old white men in media and electioneering, who refuse to be ordered around to benefit a woman. A black man was definitely the last straw, a step too far, and no female could be allowed to be next. Not in their lifetimes. Never surrender.
Hillary should have been the nominee in 2008, and Barack this year.
22
"To be honest, I don’t fully understand this resentment."
I don't know what to tell you, Professor K., except that you really need to get out of the house more. By that, I mean you need to watch a little Fox (maybe on the TV in the hotel gym while you're on book tour or in Davos), take a drive from Manhattan to Syracuse or Rochester, spend a holiday dinner with people like MY relatives that supported Trump.
For those folks, true, its identity politics 24/7. They are supremely angry that the white world with lots of decently paying jobs with benefits is gone. They hate having a female or a person of color getting the position they think should be theirs by right. They feel like they've been falling behind for 3 decades and they are willing to listen to any white male who speaks to them in declarative sentences and tells them that the things they hate are the causes of their problems, that he alone can fix their broken lives and dashed expectations.
Yet they are all Americans and they vote, dependably and in large numbers. They don't respond to nuanced arguments about policy and visions of a more inclusive, fairer nation. They feel like they have been played for suckers (which is true) and they blame the people they have been told were given a place in line ahead of them. They only listen to populism. The Democrats need a new messenger who can give them some.
I don't know what to tell you, Professor K., except that you really need to get out of the house more. By that, I mean you need to watch a little Fox (maybe on the TV in the hotel gym while you're on book tour or in Davos), take a drive from Manhattan to Syracuse or Rochester, spend a holiday dinner with people like MY relatives that supported Trump.
For those folks, true, its identity politics 24/7. They are supremely angry that the white world with lots of decently paying jobs with benefits is gone. They hate having a female or a person of color getting the position they think should be theirs by right. They feel like they've been falling behind for 3 decades and they are willing to listen to any white male who speaks to them in declarative sentences and tells them that the things they hate are the causes of their problems, that he alone can fix their broken lives and dashed expectations.
Yet they are all Americans and they vote, dependably and in large numbers. They don't respond to nuanced arguments about policy and visions of a more inclusive, fairer nation. They feel like they have been played for suckers (which is true) and they blame the people they have been told were given a place in line ahead of them. They only listen to populism. The Democrats need a new messenger who can give them some.
26
Dr. Krugman asserts that the only way to explain what happened in Clay County is to see the vote as an expression of white resentment. Yet he provided a well reasoned alternative explanation two paragraphs back. Mr. Trump promised to bring the coal mining jobs back, and the voters believed him. Dr. Krugman's conclusion to ascribe the worst motivations to the voters who supported Mr. Trump was simply pulled out of a hat.
11
The Democratic party does not need an autopsy of the Clinton campaign so much as a deep analysis of why Bernie Sanders did so well.
44
I've lost track of how many times these Trump supporters have voted against their own self-interests. It's going on decades now. Now they have stepped up to voting against the world's self interest.
28
Why did Hillary and the Democrats not focus on exposing Trump's false promises, on the stump, in debates? This drove me absolutely nuts during the campaign.
15
While I can't speak to the specific example of Clay Co, KY, I can say that here in WV where the demographics are very similar to eastern KY, especially in the southern coalfield counties, the GOP has done a masterful job, with a huge assist from the Friends of Coal and the Koch Bros and their ilk, of blaming the failures of the state on eighty years of Democratic rule. Up until 2000 WV was a blue state and even though the Democrats that ruled here were among the most conservative in the country (see our current Senator Manchin's voting record) they were all in servitude to Big Coal. Never mind that the Republicans who managed to get elected were exactly the same and worse. With the dimishment of the power of the United Mine Workers somehow the Big Coal operators convinced the miners that they both had the same enemy and that enemy was the US government and, in particular, Barack Obama. Sixteen years later WV is now among the reddest of states from top to bottom.
16
For the privileged, equality feels like oppression.
38
I currently reading "White Trash - The 400-year untold history of class in America" by Nancy Isenberg, which IMO should be required reading for every DNC and rank and file democrat for a clearer understanding of the genesis of class segregation in our country. Pleasing fantastical tales of the country's founding such as The Mayflower, Pilgrims, Thanksgiving, Pocahontas, Jamestown, have served to obscure and often erased from the pages of our history a more troubling and darker truth. A deeper and honest investigation by Ms. Isenberg reveals a country propel by a contempt and indifference for a large portion of the poor, slaved white workers by the founding upper class of the country.
"... Americans lack any deeper appreciation of class. Beyond white anger and ignorance is a far more complicated history of class identity that dates back to America’s colonial period and British notions of poverty. In many ways, our class system has hinged on the evolving political rationales used to dismiss or demonize (or occasionally reclaim) those white rural outcasts seemingly incapable of becoming part of the mainstream society."
Sounds familiar?
"... Americans lack any deeper appreciation of class. Beyond white anger and ignorance is a far more complicated history of class identity that dates back to America’s colonial period and British notions of poverty. In many ways, our class system has hinged on the evolving political rationales used to dismiss or demonize (or occasionally reclaim) those white rural outcasts seemingly incapable of becoming part of the mainstream society."
Sounds familiar?
15
The problem with Democratic party appeal will continue as long as they continue to believe "the white working class just voted overwhelmingly against its own economic interests." First, a general point: Any claim that a place like Clay County is better off now that the uninsured health care rate fell 17 percent is illogical. Citizens sign up for the ACA because it's the law, not necessarily because it improves their position. The 17 percent that are now insured receive subsidies to cover most if not all of their costs. That does nothing but irritate the working class, whose premiums increased, deductibles increased and their choices decrease. The coal jobs didn't go away simply because of a shift in mining tactics. The writer failed to mention how new EPA restrictions have made it next to impossible to for coal to remain economically competitive. So let's be serious, honest and clear. The Democrats have been playing identity politics for so long they know no other way. And the writer of this piece shows they haven't learned anything from the election.
18
Well, whatever the reason why Trump won the Presidency is, it's clear the Jay Gould was on to something when he said:
"I can hire one half of the working class to kill the other half."
Substitute "vote against" for "kill" and you've got the core result of what happened November 8.
"I can hire one half of the working class to kill the other half."
Substitute "vote against" for "kill" and you've got the core result of what happened November 8.
18
Paul, you are the main reason why I continue my subscription to the Times, even after deep post-election resentment for excessive coverage of Trump's every burp, and of Hillary's emails. Thank you also for beginning with how the FBI letters released weeks and days before the election "laid such a heavy thumb on the scales." I fear not enough high office democrats denounced this-- or the Benghazi hearings-- as attempts to diminish Hillary's character, attempts that sadly proved fruitful. Finally, I thank you for warning the democratic party against veering towards a bit of more populism. My take on the resentment towards a possible liberal disdain is misinformation, education and language. If the internet is misleading (what an affected post-election surprise we are all performing with news of how fast false information goes around), then you can count on word of mouth being even profoundly more misleading. Even more so in rural areas. Plus pure, patriarchic conservatism. I sadly have this image in my head, that I am sure took place in many households across America, of men telling their wives, "You don't know what you're talking about, vote for Trump. I know" Also, in a lot of these places, people feel things are changing too fast. We are actually confronting people's fear of change. Trump understands that fear, and through fear, double speak and confusion he gets his way. Is there really no way to elect her on December 19th?
15
I read this piece and had one thought: They want jobs. Then I read through dozens of comments here and only found one, by M. Gessbergwitz of Westchester, that says it so simply and does not try to explain away all of the Democratic Party/Clinton/Obama failures but sticks to this one question. Worth quoting: "These people want jobs. Respectful jobs that they earn and make them feel rewarded at the end of the day." Forget identity politics and handouts. They want jobs. They want jobs.
They don't want handouts. They don't want regulations. And please, don't call them racist.
They don't want handouts. They don't want regulations. And please, don't call them racist.
30
This election was deranged by false information that fed on emotions. If you hear for 20 years that the so-called "liberal elite" disdains you, thinks you're stupid hillbillies; if you are told, urgently, that Obama and Clinton are going to take away your guns (p.s., huge profits for gun industry); if you have been told Obama is a Kenyan Muslim practicing secret Sharia law, and the Muslims are going to take over; if you've been convinced Clinton is operating a child abuse ring out of a Washington DC pizza restaurant; if Alex Jones convinced you that Sandy Hook was a hoax and actors paid by Dems tricked the nation into believing 20 little children were brutally murdered (again, to take away your guns); and on and on, all the endless ridiculous mean-spirited fake news that is more real to millions of Americans than the facts; then certainly you vote for a Trump. He peddled in snake oil, vile hatred, and gleefully fed the stinging resentment and loss of dignity many struggling Americans suffer.
Absolutely nothing about Trump's corrupt, racist, misogynist past and present stuck for these voters. He "felt" and spoke their sad, depressing pain, and that was everything to them.
Absolutely nothing about Trump's corrupt, racist, misogynist past and present stuck for these voters. He "felt" and spoke their sad, depressing pain, and that was everything to them.
32
It's as perplexing a question as why Kansas is Republican.
6
What could Paul Krugman possibly know about the working class? The closest he has probably ever come to physical labor is sharpening a pencil, and that he probably has his assistant do for him. Do you ever notice it is the most elite among us that have all the advice for the working class? If everything were so wonderful, they would have jobs that paid a living wage, instead of having to work a mindless job or two, for minimum wage, or have to spend months or possibly years unemployed. What would you have them do? Should they vote for the status quo which clearly isn't working for them? Would anyone have noticed them at all if the rust belt states didn't turn red? Would anyone care about them at all? The answer is no. Limousine liberals can talk all they want about things that ordinary people don't care about on their own time, but for people who work hard and struggle every day, it was time for a change.
32
Naturally an economist will see every problem in economic terms. But an important factor has been the rapid extreme changes in social moral norms. The removal of legal constraints on homosexual acts was generally accepted very readily, as a willingness not to have government pry into private concerns. But that was rapidly succeeded by gay marriage – a very public matter - and now governmental involvement in transgender toilet access in schools.
Civil society depends on people behaving in generally agreed ways within their local community. However, moral issues derive from religious traditions, and the push to overthrow traditional morality with an entirely new system of thinking establishing LGBT behavior as a public norm by government action disturbs wide swathes of society. It has even undermined separation of Church and State. Changing social norms must happen slowly, by spreading ideas, but to politicize these deep human instincts is very disturbing, and evokes strong, if incoherent, reactions.
The role of universities is also important, considering the correlation of voting with educational level. The new morality promoted by 'progressive' academics is incomprehensible to the common sense mentality, and the result is electoral rage. Consider the incomprehensible behavior of intellectuals preventing invitees from speaking, but defending that as 'free speech'; or protecting favored groups from micro-aggression, but turning on chosen victims with maximum aggression
Civil society depends on people behaving in generally agreed ways within their local community. However, moral issues derive from religious traditions, and the push to overthrow traditional morality with an entirely new system of thinking establishing LGBT behavior as a public norm by government action disturbs wide swathes of society. It has even undermined separation of Church and State. Changing social norms must happen slowly, by spreading ideas, but to politicize these deep human instincts is very disturbing, and evokes strong, if incoherent, reactions.
The role of universities is also important, considering the correlation of voting with educational level. The new morality promoted by 'progressive' academics is incomprehensible to the common sense mentality, and the result is electoral rage. Consider the incomprehensible behavior of intellectuals preventing invitees from speaking, but defending that as 'free speech'; or protecting favored groups from micro-aggression, but turning on chosen victims with maximum aggression
16
You took the words right out of my mouth and why I just don't buy Bernie's way of going forward. In fact, I think it could be further disaster. And when I read your words -- I take out a very broad brush and start scrawling "stupid morons" everywhere -- not generous but how I feel right now. I'm a white woman in my late fifties -- I say let the full embrace of identity politics begin.
9
Professor Krugman, what was the last time you personally visited Clay County and talked individually with its residents about their hopes and fears?
31
It being a day of the week ending in "y" and a columnist with a vowel in their name we must have another column about Donald Trump. Would that Mrs. Clinton had won and we could have basked in the rosy glow of columns predicting daily rainbows, unicorns on parade, and free everything. And maybe, just maybe, we would have read even one column on some subject other than the just completed election.
9
Oh, come on, Krugman, it was all those inner-cities filled with minority voters "without college degrees" that has kept the DNC Politburo in place for the last eight years. Knock that vote out, and Hillary would have gotten less than two-third what was counted.
Smart fellow like you prevaricating with data like that. And as to Comey's "heavy thumb"--face facts, nobody really liked her--no energy behind her. That's the enemy not a bunch of "no-college" white guys who have finally had it with our current do-nothing president.
Smart fellow like you prevaricating with data like that. And as to Comey's "heavy thumb"--face facts, nobody really liked her--no energy behind her. That's the enemy not a bunch of "no-college" white guys who have finally had it with our current do-nothing president.
22
Well there you go again, taking another shot at Bernie Sanders. I don't think the answer for democrats is to have a candidate who gives more closed-door speeches to Goldman-Sach for $500k a pop and speaking ill of the other candidates followers who you intend to lead (remember the deplorables?)
Seeing as Sanders consistently polled better than Clinton head-to-head v. Trump I would defer to the senator's judgment.
Seeing as Sanders consistently polled better than Clinton head-to-head v. Trump I would defer to the senator's judgment.
26
I'm sorry but as a union member that went on strike for three years all the while living in my father's basement while getting a bachelor's of science degree in applied math.
you are nothing to me
specially Reagan democrats!!!
you are nothing to me
specially Reagan democrats!!!
5
I heaving a great big Al Gore sigh. It's really very simple. Hillary pledged to be Obama's third term. People are sick and tired of year-after-year 1% GDP growth at the cost of trillions and trillions of dollars in additional debt.
It was the economy the whole time. That's it.
It was the economy the whole time. That's it.
13
To be clear, the white working class-- and for that matter, white people in general-- would rather suffer economically than make common political cause with the black and brown workers with whom they uneasily share this nation. This story is not new, nor is it likely to change.
More troubling are the rapidly increasing and dire consequences of such attitudes toward the continued economic health and feasibility of the country. The continued accumulation of wealth at the top of the income scale will continue unabated, and one wonders how severe the damage will have to be before some sort of peaceful reckoning can or will be achieved.
More troubling are the rapidly increasing and dire consequences of such attitudes toward the continued economic health and feasibility of the country. The continued accumulation of wealth at the top of the income scale will continue unabated, and one wonders how severe the damage will have to be before some sort of peaceful reckoning can or will be achieved.
11
Americans are sick of identity politics from both parties. The Democrats have no strategy but the same tired coalition of bankers/"intellectuals"/ professionals/Whole Food shoppers, and minorities. How absurd to think that these two groups, the top 10% and minorities, have anything substantive in common.
The real goal of all of Krugman's politics (and the Democrats') is to keep the conversation away from social class. Ditto for the Republican establishment. The fear of both parties is that friendship between whites and blacks might break out, or that LGBTQ's might find friends in West Virginia.
As long as voters buy into defining themselves along cultural lines to the exclusion of social class we will live in Krugman's dystopia. Readers should try hard to understand that the only path to happiness in America is by building a strong sense of community, and this starts with work, income, wealth and so on.
Oxfam's report in Jan. 2016 shows us that the 62 wealthiest individuals have more wealth than the bottom half of planet earth combined, 3.5 billion people. In 2010, the number was 388.
This is really what the election is about. Krugman wants us all to live in Frank Capra's "Potterville" from the movie "It's a Wonderful Life." Don't believe it, fellow democrats. The real issue of this election is work, not identity.
Thomas Frank's book, "Listen, Liberal: Or Whatever Happened to the Party of the People" gives a fantastic analysis of Democratic party.
The real goal of all of Krugman's politics (and the Democrats') is to keep the conversation away from social class. Ditto for the Republican establishment. The fear of both parties is that friendship between whites and blacks might break out, or that LGBTQ's might find friends in West Virginia.
As long as voters buy into defining themselves along cultural lines to the exclusion of social class we will live in Krugman's dystopia. Readers should try hard to understand that the only path to happiness in America is by building a strong sense of community, and this starts with work, income, wealth and so on.
Oxfam's report in Jan. 2016 shows us that the 62 wealthiest individuals have more wealth than the bottom half of planet earth combined, 3.5 billion people. In 2010, the number was 388.
This is really what the election is about. Krugman wants us all to live in Frank Capra's "Potterville" from the movie "It's a Wonderful Life." Don't believe it, fellow democrats. The real issue of this election is work, not identity.
Thomas Frank's book, "Listen, Liberal: Or Whatever Happened to the Party of the People" gives a fantastic analysis of Democratic party.
25
Americans are sick of Trump.
He will be the least popular President in American history by far, and the one who lost my the most votes.
He will be the least popular President in American history by far, and the one who lost my the most votes.
7
Hear, hear. You tell him!
10
The more I think about this, the crazier this is. Trump wants the fiscal stimulus Krugman says he wants. The market says it will produce the growth Krugman predicted. So instead of claiming victory, he says what a disaster.
7
You left out the part about Trump's tax cuts for the rich, which runs up the deficit, which leads to higher interest rates, which brings on the next recession.
15
Mr. Krugman does not understand this phenomenon. He has never driven through the midwest and only heard the Limbaughs of the world broadcasting 24-7 that the social, moral, economic, etc. world is collapsing and that it is the Democratic Party's fault. The politicizing of the churches anti deemocrats adds another layer of, I hate to say, brainwashing.
These are not dumb people. Until the democrats counter the powerful right wing voice nothing will change. Marketing is not the democrat's long suit but needs to be as forceful as the republican's.
As my sister said "I hate democrats." Guess what she watches on television and where she goes to church.
These are not dumb people. Until the democrats counter the powerful right wing voice nothing will change. Marketing is not the democrat's long suit but needs to be as forceful as the republican's.
As my sister said "I hate democrats." Guess what she watches on television and where she goes to church.
16
"The only way to make sense of what happened is to see the vote as an expression of, well, identity politics — some combination of white resentment at what voters see as favoritism toward nonwhites."
I notice that many of the counties that Clinton lost in 2016 voted for Obama in 2008 and 2012.
I notice that many of the counties that Clinton lost in 2016 voted for Obama in 2008 and 2012.
17
We shouldn't be letting a handful of small counties run the country at the expense of the rest of the country, who very decisively chose Hillary.
9
I spent all my working life around white non college workers They are great people but tend to be quite racist. During the Roosevelt era when liberalism ruled the roost, the problem of racism was not addressed. Segregation and discrimination were accepted norms. The south was solidly Democratic. But when Democrats moved to address the problem of racism, they stepped on a land mine. The problem the Democrats have to face is that racism is a stronger driving force than the benefits that would come to a working person through a more liberal government. Even though the deep south climbed out of the dirt poor hole it was in before the civil rights era, they'd give it all up to return to the good old days.
22
Mr. Krugman has been tone deaf to those who lost jobs due to globalization for decades. He now cites one small example where globalization can not be blamed to cover his tracks - a record of relentlessly promoting globalization, with now proven false arguments and contempt for its victims.
This is what he wrote, quote
"I guess I should have expected that this comment ( a pro globalization piece in the NY Times) would generate letters along the lines of, "Well, if you lose your comfortable position as an American professor you can always find another job--as long as you are 12 years old and willing to work for 40 cents an hour."
Such moral outrage is common among the opponents of globalization--of the transfer of technology and capital from high-wage to low-wage countries
So, those who lost jobs suffer "from moral outrage"
And to rub it in, he wrote
"In short, my correspondents are not entitled to their self-righteousness. They have not thought the matter through."
So, those who lost jobs and complain to the estimed economist, have not thought matters through.
Oh, yes, they have. And as recent economic research proved, they were right. Read
The China Syndrome: Local Labor Market Effects of Import Competition in the United States†. By David H. Autor, David Dorn, and Gordon H. Hanson
http://economics.mit.edu/files/6613
Mr. Krugman, more than any other economist, got it wrong. He owes the American working class an apology.
Rather than piling it on.
This is what he wrote, quote
"I guess I should have expected that this comment ( a pro globalization piece in the NY Times) would generate letters along the lines of, "Well, if you lose your comfortable position as an American professor you can always find another job--as long as you are 12 years old and willing to work for 40 cents an hour."
Such moral outrage is common among the opponents of globalization--of the transfer of technology and capital from high-wage to low-wage countries
So, those who lost jobs suffer "from moral outrage"
And to rub it in, he wrote
"In short, my correspondents are not entitled to their self-righteousness. They have not thought the matter through."
So, those who lost jobs and complain to the estimed economist, have not thought matters through.
Oh, yes, they have. And as recent economic research proved, they were right. Read
The China Syndrome: Local Labor Market Effects of Import Competition in the United States†. By David H. Autor, David Dorn, and Gordon H. Hanson
http://economics.mit.edu/files/6613
Mr. Krugman, more than any other economist, got it wrong. He owes the American working class an apology.
Rather than piling it on.
33
“I don’t know why imagined liberal disdain inspires so much more anger than the very real disdain of conservatives who see the poverty of places like eastern Kentucky as a sign of the personal and moral inadequacy of their residents.” This is an unearthly statement because the working class, especially its lower rank and file, have found it out that both the two-party wings of the establishment have degenerated into a tool of “the god of money” at the expense of the working class regardless of racial identity, origin, occupation or work place.
Pot-calling-kettle-black between the two wings has no bearing on the question of socio-political conflicts and struggles between capital and labor, haves and have-nots, power elite and the powerless, rich and poor, and progressiveness and backwardness. The author should consider issues and problems of the nation outside partisan bickering; if otherwise, he would have lost his good senses. The fundamental problem that the working class envisages is not healthcare policy comparisons, conservativism v. liberalism, trade v. anti-trade, and other policy tweaking or self-adjustment that the economy faces but the perils that unemployment, underemployment and stagnant wage increasingly aplenty since the early 1970s.
Neither populism nor liberalism can solve the life or death unemployment problem.
Pot-calling-kettle-black between the two wings has no bearing on the question of socio-political conflicts and struggles between capital and labor, haves and have-nots, power elite and the powerless, rich and poor, and progressiveness and backwardness. The author should consider issues and problems of the nation outside partisan bickering; if otherwise, he would have lost his good senses. The fundamental problem that the working class envisages is not healthcare policy comparisons, conservativism v. liberalism, trade v. anti-trade, and other policy tweaking or self-adjustment that the economy faces but the perils that unemployment, underemployment and stagnant wage increasingly aplenty since the early 1970s.
Neither populism nor liberalism can solve the life or death unemployment problem.
8
Until the day comes that democrats/progressives begin to campaign in red states, progress will remain in Sisyphus mode. You need to be in every little town, exposing republican economic lies, providing information/education in basic economics. If you can convince them of the benefits your economics then you might have a chance at whatever other resentments are nurtured generation after generation. The popular vote will increasingly favor progress but the distribution of house and senate seats work against it. Since Trump's election it is disheartening to hear much talk in the international media of "America being left behind". Time for an "economics civil rights movement" in red country.
18
The Trump triumph merely capstones a decades long effort on the part of the well-embedded American oligarchy to instate a new form of feudalism in the United States with a rigid caste system. One can completely discard any pathetic dreams of successive générations climbing the social class ladder. Yes Mr Trump, the game is 'rigged', mainly against the common man who lacks the insiders' knowledge your father bequeated to you and which your offspring enjoy today, too.
22
Here we go again. The “poor angry whites” handed Trump victory narrative again. Krugman's example? Clay Country, KY where he notes that “Mr. Trump received 87 percent of Clay County’s vote.” Sounds pretty dramatic, right? Well, Romney won 84% of the vote there in 2012. 6,176 votes in 2012 and 5,861 in 2016. In other words, FEWER votes for Trump this election.
It is a complete misinterpretation of what happened in this election, and I really wish I knew where it came from. Probably just a vague impression of who voted for Trump based on news reports of Trump rallies. The reality is, Trump supporters had median incomes >70K. Democratic support was down dramatically since 2012 whereas Republican support has remained flat since 2008. The really question is, what make Democratic voters stay home? Answer: a long-term, relentless hit job on Hillary Clinton. The poor white vote had little to do with this electoral outcome.
It is a complete misinterpretation of what happened in this election, and I really wish I knew where it came from. Probably just a vague impression of who voted for Trump based on news reports of Trump rallies. The reality is, Trump supporters had median incomes >70K. Democratic support was down dramatically since 2012 whereas Republican support has remained flat since 2008. The really question is, what make Democratic voters stay home? Answer: a long-term, relentless hit job on Hillary Clinton. The poor white vote had little to do with this electoral outcome.
17
Where does it come from? It comes from the fact that Krugman is an establishment Democrat who made his career as a globalization cheerleader, and like most members of the establishment, is unwilling to face facts.
17
Sorry, but this election actually was decided largely on policy: immigration, Muslim policy, trade, NATO, Obamacare, crime, etc.
Also, we should call out what "identity" politics actually is: it is a set of preferences and favoritism for specific groups, usually based on ethnicity, religion, race, sex, sexual orientation, etc. If you are not in one of those groups and are not sufficiently affluent to be unaffected directly, you are likely to resent that favoritism.
The left and the left-leaning media, such as Times reporters and columnists, confuse resentment with the emotions they portray by hurling insults: racism, misogyny, sexism, etc.
So now, those who are not in the favored classes (sorry, kid, wrong identity), who feel resentment, are now called nasty names. Yup, that'll really bring in the votes.
Also, we should call out what "identity" politics actually is: it is a set of preferences and favoritism for specific groups, usually based on ethnicity, religion, race, sex, sexual orientation, etc. If you are not in one of those groups and are not sufficiently affluent to be unaffected directly, you are likely to resent that favoritism.
The left and the left-leaning media, such as Times reporters and columnists, confuse resentment with the emotions they portray by hurling insults: racism, misogyny, sexism, etc.
So now, those who are not in the favored classes (sorry, kid, wrong identity), who feel resentment, are now called nasty names. Yup, that'll really bring in the votes.
21
President-elect Trump is a victory for Fox News, Rush Limbaugh et. al. For eight years, the right-wing news outlets have blamed President Obama for all the nation's ills while ignoring that the economy, for the most part, has recovered from the Great Recession. I have heard, verbatim, over and over again, that "he was the lesser of two evils" - very effective propaganda. Now, the Republican party is in complete control of our government and it will be interesting to see how Fox News spins the chaos that will ensue both domestically and abroad.
I have read that less than 1/4 of Americans who are eligible to vote actually voted. This complacency is a larger issue than Fox News' propaganda. If we want to emphasize the importance of participating in the democratic process, election day should be a national holiday and voting should be mandatory as it is Australia. Still, not everyone would vote but our country would send a powerful message that if you live in a democracy it is important to participate.
I have read that less than 1/4 of Americans who are eligible to vote actually voted. This complacency is a larger issue than Fox News' propaganda. If we want to emphasize the importance of participating in the democratic process, election day should be a national holiday and voting should be mandatory as it is Australia. Still, not everyone would vote but our country would send a powerful message that if you live in a democracy it is important to participate.
16
Professor Krugman, I look at your behavior and I have to ask, "did you want Trump to win?"
10
I live in a poor white town, one of those towns that is dying, has boarded up downtown windows, and abandoned houses. This is what it's like. My husband runs a business but he can't find people who even bother to call in if they aren't coming to work. There is little here besides a small Walmart and a Dollar General but people don't want to drive to the next town over, a town that is having a building boom. It's a college town and they don't trust those kind of people. Thirty miles away there is a vo-tech school that teaches everything you would want to know about computers to get a job. They teach skills from restaurant management to nursing to car mechanics to drafting to plumbing, air conditioning, heating and more. But nobody wants to go there to learn a marketable skill. There are two colleges thirty miles away, but like I said, they don't trust college people. The state pays for high school kids to go to the vo-tech but my neighbors complained to me that there kids didn't get in the program and it shouldn't matter if kids make all Fs, you don't need to pass math to be a nurse.
It's excuses, excuses, excuses as to why they don't have jobs, but they never blame their lack of skills, lack of education, and lack of knowing how to show up at school and work. They expect to sit on their front porches and smoke all day and complain that nobody builds a factory here.
It's excuses, excuses, excuses as to why they don't have jobs, but they never blame their lack of skills, lack of education, and lack of knowing how to show up at school and work. They expect to sit on their front porches and smoke all day and complain that nobody builds a factory here.
40
Paul Krugman's last sentence, that,"...: Democrats have to figure out why..." is a real poser and alas, I think the answer is "Democrats" in the U.S. is a hollow shell. Who is left to figure it out? Certainly not the "uneducated white men." A lot of their fathers identified with and even fought and died for the labor movement in the early 20th century. Clearly, that battle has been lost to greed, selfishness and monied interests. The only path forward is to start telling the truth about ourselves and I don't see that happening any time soon.
17
Fortunately, this demographic is on its way out like the dinosaurs. Next election there will be fewer of them. Furthermore, if they are so illiterate, the only option is to better educate them which is not a Republican mandate as the more ignorant their voters are, the more they can be bamboozled.
6
Dr. Krugman's point about Comey is correct. In fact if it was done to Trump, Republicans would have been all over screaming "rigged elections" and "illegitimate president" and we'd be having hearings in Congress on what actually prompted Comey to act illegally send the letter and why Guilani knew about it beforehand. I'd like Times' Upshot to do an analysis of the poll trends before and after the letter in the swing state and estimate the results had the letter not been sent.
Most commenters have already pointed out to many reasons the election was close: Identity politics, Tribalism (voting for Republicans because everyone around you is supposed to do that), Being fed up with the politicians, Sexism (not accepting a woman can be a strong commander in chief), Single issue voters (Guns, Religion), Poor education and lack of critical thinking (believing a charlatan who tells you whatever you want to hear). Refer to Michael Moore's now famous prediction why Trump will win for a good analysis. NPR also has good interviews with voters across the country.
"To be honest, I don’t fully understand this resentment. In particular, I don’t know why imagined liberal disdain inspires so much more anger ..."
It's not that difficult to explain: very effective and ceaseless propaganda by the right wing operatives who sell this story. It's not unique to US either. I'm pretty sure social psychologists have well studied and can explain it.
Most commenters have already pointed out to many reasons the election was close: Identity politics, Tribalism (voting for Republicans because everyone around you is supposed to do that), Being fed up with the politicians, Sexism (not accepting a woman can be a strong commander in chief), Single issue voters (Guns, Religion), Poor education and lack of critical thinking (believing a charlatan who tells you whatever you want to hear). Refer to Michael Moore's now famous prediction why Trump will win for a good analysis. NPR also has good interviews with voters across the country.
"To be honest, I don’t fully understand this resentment. In particular, I don’t know why imagined liberal disdain inspires so much more anger ..."
It's not that difficult to explain: very effective and ceaseless propaganda by the right wing operatives who sell this story. It's not unique to US either. I'm pretty sure social psychologists have well studied and can explain it.
19
The GOP speaks to these people, while the Dems speak to theirs. If the dems never begin to speak to them they will never listen.
10
I came across this Obama quote in an "Atlantic" article about Iowa: "Like a lot of small towns in the Midwest, the jobs have been gone now for 25 years and nothing's replaced them. And they fell through the Clinton administration, and the Bush administration, and each successive administration has said that somehow these communities are gonna regenerate and they have not. So it's not surprising then that they get bitter, they cling to guns or religion or antipathy to people who aren't like them or anti-immigrant sentiment or anti-trade sentiment as a way to explain their frustrations." B-I-N-G-O! I don't want to hear any Democrat say they don't understand. President Obama knew it.
22
The white working class is behaving exactly like it has often accused the minority classes of behaving. They are waiting for a magical hero to pull them out of the morass of poverty, looking for a handout in the form of some jobs program or other nonsense that isn't going to happen.
What they really need to be doing is taking a page from their own criticism playbook and pulling themselves up by their own bootstraps by any means possible. They lack the skills to get ahead in today's economy and are not lifting a finger to gain the training or the education they need to compete. In earlier times, when jobs disappeared from an area, people got up off their butts and moved their families to areas where jobs were more plentiful. They didn't sit around and wait for a president to restore what couldn't be restored. I'm so done with the left (and I consider myself quite leftist) trying to help these people when they won't even help themselves.
What they really need to be doing is taking a page from their own criticism playbook and pulling themselves up by their own bootstraps by any means possible. They lack the skills to get ahead in today's economy and are not lifting a finger to gain the training or the education they need to compete. In earlier times, when jobs disappeared from an area, people got up off their butts and moved their families to areas where jobs were more plentiful. They didn't sit around and wait for a president to restore what couldn't be restored. I'm so done with the left (and I consider myself quite leftist) trying to help these people when they won't even help themselves.
10
People wanted change.
Desperation led them to elect an "outsider" who is the definition of the 1% of the 1%.
Something tells me that this will not lead to anything good.
Desperation led them to elect an "outsider" who is the definition of the 1% of the 1%.
Something tells me that this will not lead to anything good.
9
Looks like Trump may inspire Carrier to stay in the US, and at least is taking credit for Ford keeping some manufacturing here.
So here is the question? Will Trump simply create government incentives to bring back coal, so his story works? Will bully companies into keeping jobs here.
Not that I believe in the utopia of free markets, but how does this align with years of republican support of unregulated markets?
So here is the question? Will Trump simply create government incentives to bring back coal, so his story works? Will bully companies into keeping jobs here.
Not that I believe in the utopia of free markets, but how does this align with years of republican support of unregulated markets?
2
The real question is why do people vote against their own economic interest?
5
They are constantly convinced otherwise. Mortgages that are overwhelming, car leases that drain them, luxuries unaffordable. The list goes on. Saving a small percent of their income? Never heard of that.
5
First and foremost people on the far left like Jill Stein and especially Bernie Sanders hurt Hillary Clinton. Jill Stein took votes away from Hillary Clinton in Michigan and possibly in other states. Bernie Sanders really hurt Clinton by saying that she had poor judgement in voting for the Iraqi war. Mrs. Clinton admitted she had made a mistake. Trump used that line over and over again while attacking Mrs. Clinton. So what did Stein and Sanders accomplish? They hurt a candidate that would have implemented or pursued some of their ideas. Stein and Sanders knew they were never going to win, yet they exacted a toll. Ralph Nader, who no one has really heard from since the 2000 election, exacted his toll. Nader stole votes from Gore in Florida and we got Bush. Mrs. Clinton should have really called these people out and outlined what they were doing to her candidacy. She should have questioned Sanders' credibility since he was never a real Democrat. Finally, Hillary Clinton should have been more forthright about her email server. She played games for a long time when it came to the private server. It was alway veiled information. Trump painted Clinton and her husband as some kind of crooks. She should have met him head on and kept the pressure up, since Trump is really the one with the questionable background. FBI director James Comey should have been called out for his meddling in the election. The Democrats need a candidate who will basically take no prisoners.
8
Sure, it was all Comey's fault. Keep telling yourselves that.
10
Wow, from reading the top comments on this article and Professor Krugman's piece, a significant portion of the Times just doesn't get it. Unable to escape the tautology of identity politics & the Regressive left, they blame racism, sexism, etc for the failings of their candidate. I call myself an independent and I want many Democratic social and economic policies to be instituted, but the DNC will lose the next election unless they do some major reorganization in message and tone.
18
How difficult is it to say outright, those who are constantly scammed, should have done better in school. And how difficult is it to say outright that southern schools have always gotten the short end of the stick. How difficult is it to say, ignorance can be overcome with an open mind. With education, you either learn how to scam or how to fend it off. Without an education you will always be giving away you rights, your money and your privacy.
"Come all ye young children so young and so fine, seek not your fortune down in the mine. It'll form like a habit and get into your soul, til the blood of your body, 'comes black as the coal."
"Come all ye young children so young and so fine, seek not your fortune down in the mine. It'll form like a habit and get into your soul, til the blood of your body, 'comes black as the coal."
6
Yes, the folks in the Rust Belt want good jobs, but all you promise them are handouts, freebies, and giveaways. ACA subsidies. Guarantees. Mandates, etc. You don’t seem to understand that the bribes which buy the votes of the urban poor don’t work among people who simply don’t want taxpayer funded charity.
Indeed, don’t you prove, in this column, that “liberal elites” look down on these folks, imagining, as you do, that their allegiance can be bought by handouts?
And identity politics IS crucial. Keep telling people that they’re racists and, sooner or later, they come to resent that canard.
If, as you contend, “... the white working class just voted overwhelmingly against its own economic interests”, is not the reciprocal just as true? That rich leftists on the coasts overwhelming voted against THEIR economic interests? Indeed, don’t YOU routinely vote against your economic interests?
It may be impossible – and undesirable – to direct economic activity to the heartland. Many areas grew up precisely because of their proximity to natural resources and, when the demand or utility of same fade, the people living there need to find alternatives. Or leave.
But, to paraphrase an infamous pol, “got hope”? If all the left has to offer these people is a lifetime of taxpayer funded idleness, it may take a while before these folks, with very different values, come to behave like the urban poor, whose loyalty the Dems buy with taxpayer funded bribes.
Indeed, don’t you prove, in this column, that “liberal elites” look down on these folks, imagining, as you do, that their allegiance can be bought by handouts?
And identity politics IS crucial. Keep telling people that they’re racists and, sooner or later, they come to resent that canard.
If, as you contend, “... the white working class just voted overwhelmingly against its own economic interests”, is not the reciprocal just as true? That rich leftists on the coasts overwhelming voted against THEIR economic interests? Indeed, don’t YOU routinely vote against your economic interests?
It may be impossible – and undesirable – to direct economic activity to the heartland. Many areas grew up precisely because of their proximity to natural resources and, when the demand or utility of same fade, the people living there need to find alternatives. Or leave.
But, to paraphrase an infamous pol, “got hope”? If all the left has to offer these people is a lifetime of taxpayer funded idleness, it may take a while before these folks, with very different values, come to behave like the urban poor, whose loyalty the Dems buy with taxpayer funded bribes.
10
Mr. Krugman wrote, "To be honest, I don’t fully understand this resentment."
It's very easy, the right-wing media, Fox News, Rush Limbaugh, etc.
It's very easy, the right-wing media, Fox News, Rush Limbaugh, etc.
11
Just look at the story in the NYTimes about "Many in Florida Count on Obama’s Health Law." You'll find that Trump voters are signing up to renew their Obamacare, counting on the fact that that they don't think Trump will take it away. Of course, he said he would indeed get rid of it.
So those people liked Trump because he "tells it like it is" while at the same time counting on him to do the opposite of what he said. Is there a bit of cognitive dissidence here? If not, what is it?
So those people liked Trump because he "tells it like it is" while at the same time counting on him to do the opposite of what he said. Is there a bit of cognitive dissidence here? If not, what is it?
8
Not just in America, but throughout the world, massive shifts in power and economics is happening. To understand the seemingly confused reactions of the populace a review of the grieving process might be helpful. Denial, bargaining, anger, depression, and acceptance is both an individual and collective response to the death of an era and life style. Trump's lies fed our denial and bargaining loop and provided a temporary refuge from the work to come. We are seeing the groundswell of anger developing and we will eventually move into a emotional and economic period of depression. Out of all of this will finally be an acceptance of the reality of the economic, environmental, and sociological changes to come.
7
The election has convinced me that the Democrats have completely lost the white working class vote. That voting block is gone. It is not coming back. Or at least not it's coming back for several generations.
Through Mondale, the Dems were the party of all historically disadvantaged groups. Goldwater's southern strategy was a dog whistle to working class whites that by backing civil rights and affirmative action Dems were working against their interests. The Dems pivot to being "business and free-trade friendly" under Clinton only reinforced that message.
The data from this paper show that all but the large cosmopolitan metros have been turning redder and redder for the last 25 years. A few in the party have pointed this out. But only this year did the Dems figure out that they have a big problem with the white working class. They tried to do something about it. But it was too little, too late. You can't undue twenty five years of feeling unheard and underserved, whether those feelings are justified or not.
The Dems have narrowed their ideology significantly. Instead of being the party of the historically disadvantaged, they are now the part of equal individual rights. On all other issues they are the party of "being reasonable". These are all laudable but Enlightenment Rights and Reason will not win elections. How the Dems put back together a winning coalition that does not include the working class whites is the $64,000 question.
Through Mondale, the Dems were the party of all historically disadvantaged groups. Goldwater's southern strategy was a dog whistle to working class whites that by backing civil rights and affirmative action Dems were working against their interests. The Dems pivot to being "business and free-trade friendly" under Clinton only reinforced that message.
The data from this paper show that all but the large cosmopolitan metros have been turning redder and redder for the last 25 years. A few in the party have pointed this out. But only this year did the Dems figure out that they have a big problem with the white working class. They tried to do something about it. But it was too little, too late. You can't undue twenty five years of feeling unheard and underserved, whether those feelings are justified or not.
The Dems have narrowed their ideology significantly. Instead of being the party of the historically disadvantaged, they are now the part of equal individual rights. On all other issues they are the party of "being reasonable". These are all laudable but Enlightenment Rights and Reason will not win elections. How the Dems put back together a winning coalition that does not include the working class whites is the $64,000 question.
14
Still criticizing Sanders, Dr. Krugman? How many Sanders voters stayed home on Nov. 8 due to a lack of enthusiasm?
Mrs. Clinton was the wrong candidate. Blame it on Comey if you want, but she brought the baggage with her.
Another thing she did not do was forcefully defend Obamacare and the benefits it provided to distressed folks in the Midwest. Heck, she hardly campaigned at all in the Midwest. But she did call Trump supporters "deplorables" with millionaire celebrities in NYC. That tends to rile up regular folks in the Midwest.
Mrs. Clinton was the wrong candidate. Blame it on Comey if you want, but she brought the baggage with her.
Another thing she did not do was forcefully defend Obamacare and the benefits it provided to distressed folks in the Midwest. Heck, she hardly campaigned at all in the Midwest. But she did call Trump supporters "deplorables" with millionaire celebrities in NYC. That tends to rile up regular folks in the Midwest.
15
Mr. Krugman, I am sick to death of your musings on politics. You were wrong about Hillary Clinton's electability and should stick to talking about economics where you still have credibility.
12
You don't fully understand resentment of the "liberal elite"? Propaganda works, which is why it's used. Think what began as Clear Channel, Rush Limbaugh.....and a long list of screaming cohorts. Think Fox. And in our digital age, Alex Jones, Glenn Beck, to name just two. Hour after hour, day after day, year after year, repetition, confirmation bias, perhaps even boredom has inculcated countless people with the certainty the liberals are out to destroy their world. Did I mention feminists? With the deterioration of television "news" over the last decades, thanks to Reagan, policies, and the responsibility thereof, are invisible. Third Way types moved way too far toward the corporate-controlled right. TINA, anyone? Centrist liberalism, in a definable sense, failed to communicate. Lakoff is no Frank Luntz, whose genius at spin has no equal. Hubris is a wicked mistress. Now we're in a Fourth Turning. Gonna be an interesting ride.
7
In retrospect it's not surprising Trump won: he's the only candidate you guys took seriously. If Clinton was ever mentioned, it was mainly in terms of (a) what Trump said about her, (b) what she said in relation to Trump's latest embarrassment, (c) how much better she would be than Trump, (d) what Trump's supporters had to say about her. For the entire campaign, the conversation was framed in terms of Trump.
(To be fair, there was also some talk about why she would be better than Trump --- although that was mostly in terms of how bad Trump would be, i.e. still talking mainly about Trump.)
And you gave him whatever he wanted. When he tried to deflect attention from the Trump University ruling by tweeting about the ancestry of the judge, you let him. When he tried to deflect attention from the Trump University settlement by tweeting about "Hamilton," you let him. Yes, we all know about those things, but we know a lot MORE about what he said on Twitter, and what it says about him, and what you think about him, and him him him.
For months, the campaign coverage reminded me of the old Monty Python "Spam" routine: we have Trump and Clinton, we have Trump, Clinton and Trump; we have Trump, Trump, Clinton, & Trump; we have Trump, Trump, Clinton, Trump, & Trump...
(To be fair, there was also some talk about why she would be better than Trump --- although that was mostly in terms of how bad Trump would be, i.e. still talking mainly about Trump.)
And you gave him whatever he wanted. When he tried to deflect attention from the Trump University ruling by tweeting about the ancestry of the judge, you let him. When he tried to deflect attention from the Trump University settlement by tweeting about "Hamilton," you let him. Yes, we all know about those things, but we know a lot MORE about what he said on Twitter, and what it says about him, and what you think about him, and him him him.
For months, the campaign coverage reminded me of the old Monty Python "Spam" routine: we have Trump and Clinton, we have Trump, Clinton and Trump; we have Trump, Trump, Clinton, & Trump; we have Trump, Trump, Clinton, Trump, & Trump...
14
"The only way to make sense of..." Krugman couldn't stop us what "sense" it would make to vote for a corrupt, warmongering, self-entitled career politician. Now he believes he can tell us how to make "sense" of why he was wrong. Give us a break.
4
To Paul Krugman, whose intellect can only look for answers that would make sense: You're a Nobel Prize winner who is trying to explain how the magician pulled the rabbit out of the hat. You're out of your league in that you're dealing with unimaginable ignorance. The media made the same mistake all through the campaign. Republicans themselves were paralyzed as to how to react to Trump. Whatever holes there were in Hillary Clinton's campaign, she was doomed from the start. Logic is out the window, all bets are off when you're confronted with an alien invasion from space. Paul, what would your plan be if you were locked in a closet with a cannibal? I'm not sure how you and other intellectuals can write about this without appearing naive.
10
Paul, you might reread Thomas Frank's 'What's the Matter with Kansas'; the thesis of his book still has some application.
3
Hillary lost the Rustbelt. The Rustbelt is not Kentucky-It's not the South! The rustbelt is the Midwest & Pennsylvania! She lost Wisconsin, Michigan, Ohio and Pennsylvania! She lost Union Country which consists of the traditionally white working & middle class democrats! Republicans have not won an election in Pennsylvania or Michigan since 1988! How do you explain that Trump got more minority support than Romney according to exit polls?
Life has not gotten significantly better for many people under the Obama administration in these areas. They voted for Change when they voted for Obama and have gotten little. Take a walk on Clay County, Detroit, or Flint city streets. Talk to the people about their quality of life. You say things are better in Clay County because now they have health insurance! I haven't been to Clay County, but I've been to Detroit many times. The metric of better is essentially going from living in misery to a little bit better misery. Come on! Rolling layoffs, lack of jobs, crime, and poor education run rampant.
Trump was the change candidate. Hillary was the candidate of -lets keep things as they are, your life may be bad, but it will be worse under Republicans who care about you even less than the neo-liberals- Folks who are seeing their small towns deteriorate and few if any jobs returning are not experiencing the growth folks are on the coasts and they want change.
Let's listen to Bernie & Michael Moore about how to get these votes back.
Life has not gotten significantly better for many people under the Obama administration in these areas. They voted for Change when they voted for Obama and have gotten little. Take a walk on Clay County, Detroit, or Flint city streets. Talk to the people about their quality of life. You say things are better in Clay County because now they have health insurance! I haven't been to Clay County, but I've been to Detroit many times. The metric of better is essentially going from living in misery to a little bit better misery. Come on! Rolling layoffs, lack of jobs, crime, and poor education run rampant.
Trump was the change candidate. Hillary was the candidate of -lets keep things as they are, your life may be bad, but it will be worse under Republicans who care about you even less than the neo-liberals- Folks who are seeing their small towns deteriorate and few if any jobs returning are not experiencing the growth folks are on the coasts and they want change.
Let's listen to Bernie & Michael Moore about how to get these votes back.
20
Interviews with workers who have lost reasonable jobs overwhelmingly point to their perception that the jobs were lost as a result of NAFTA and other free-trade agreements -- and to their predominant tendency to place the blame squarely on Bill Clinton and thence on Hillary. About 2.4 million jobs lost have been ascribed to trade agreements; but the fact is that the US, at present, manufactures more than ever in its history, but does so with less manufacturing labor than ever, thanks to robotic automation. (Similarly, agricultural production is at or near a high, using fewer people than ever.)
Neither Trump's unfounded promises to restore jobs nor Sanders' brand of anti-Wall Street capitalism promise to restore employment in the most hard-hit places. Democrats face a difficult challenge to devise serious policies with practical benefits -- and then explain and sell them in the face of populist resentment. Increasing the minimum wage should be an easy sell, but by itself it's hardly likely to solve systemic employment problems.
Neither Trump's unfounded promises to restore jobs nor Sanders' brand of anti-Wall Street capitalism promise to restore employment in the most hard-hit places. Democrats face a difficult challenge to devise serious policies with practical benefits -- and then explain and sell them in the face of populist resentment. Increasing the minimum wage should be an easy sell, but by itself it's hardly likely to solve systemic employment problems.
5
The answer to Mr. Krugman's question is unfortunately quite simple. Poorly educated and uniformed voters vote for those who give quick and easy answers to complicated issues. This is not correct nor it is moral, but it works almost every time and everywhere in the world except in countries with high levels of education and a politically erudite voting population.
When I lived in the US, I heard a lot about baseball, football and basketball but almost nothing about politics or foreign affairs until I moved to Germany. Thus the election results do not surprise me at all.
When I lived in the US, I heard a lot about baseball, football and basketball but almost nothing about politics or foreign affairs until I moved to Germany. Thus the election results do not surprise me at all.
14
When the jobs don't return I have no doubt that Trump will blame it on blacks, Jews, Muslims, gays, Latinos...
10
Immigration + loss of jobs + black president + female candidate who was part of NAFTA, Iraq War, repeal of Glass-Steagall, emails, Benghazi, Goldman Sachs payments + slow economic growth + isolated white uneducated Americans who fear/loath gays, black, non-Christians = Trump Victory.
Paul--you have a Nobel Prize...do the math.
Paul--you have a Nobel Prize...do the math.
6
Facts and policies do not matter.
Who wins the blame game does.
Who wins the blame game does.
5
Sir,
You write: "Hillary Clinton won the popular vote by more than two million, and she would probably be president-elect if the director of the F.B.I. hadn’t laid such a heavy thumb on the scales, just days before the election."
I encourage you and all your fellow travelers to keep faith with that worldview.
Respectfully,
Hawk
You write: "Hillary Clinton won the popular vote by more than two million, and she would probably be president-elect if the director of the F.B.I. hadn’t laid such a heavy thumb on the scales, just days before the election."
I encourage you and all your fellow travelers to keep faith with that worldview.
Respectfully,
Hawk
2
Maybe they just didn't like Hillary Clinton? A very small handful of votes in key states would have thrown it her way. A less despised candidate with lighter baggage but the same message, in my view, would have trounced Trump. I loved her, but HRC was the wrong candidate against the right opponent.
6
To put it more simply, people want to believe in magic than in facts. Indeed, declining education enables this, as such an "education" disables critical thinking.
Clay County eagerly purchased a bill of phony goods that they'll first begin to realize is phony within the first 100 days of the Trump Administration. It's no "change," but the same old, same old. Why they continue to believe a clogged toilet is a chocolate malted, buy it eagerly, and slurp it down, defies reason.
Clay County eagerly purchased a bill of phony goods that they'll first begin to realize is phony within the first 100 days of the Trump Administration. It's no "change," but the same old, same old. Why they continue to believe a clogged toilet is a chocolate malted, buy it eagerly, and slurp it down, defies reason.
8
So simple:
"What's the matter with Kansas?"
and LBJ's "If you can convince the lowest white man ..."
It hasn't changed.
"What's the matter with Kansas?"
and LBJ's "If you can convince the lowest white man ..."
It hasn't changed.
9
The problems have been cast as moral questions by the Right, not simply a business or social issue amenable to pragmatic solutions, so it doesn't matter that the government takes away health care, it was immoral to be given anything by the government in the first place. In this world jobs, work being a moral good, are created by government getting out of the way. Jobs created by the government, say WPA-style, represent more giving of someone else's money to someone who couldn't find a 'real job'. Talking about data and historical experience is sophistry meant to obscure the immorality of the solution. Yes, it be crazy, but this cracked moral frame is how the poor unemployed miner still votes against his economic interest in favor of his perceived moral interest. As I've heard many times from my friends and acquaintances back in Alabama, "I might not know anything about (fill in the blank), but I know right from wrong!" I fear the only solution is for things to get so bad that they haven't been able to discern right from wrong, and that will take a lot of bad.
6
Krugman thinks to much. Most people couldn't give a hoot about these issues. But they do care if they have a job. That, along with a merciless populist campaign of lies put Trump over the top.
9
What a bunch of bologna in the echo chamber. Democrats hadn't produced so working people are looking elsewhere. Mystery solved.
The fact that the majority of the stimulus following the recession was in tax credits and other trickle down economics is proof of how Dems cave on economic matters but fight like lions on social ones.
No one's saying abandon Gay Rights, for example, but be more like Saint Harvey Milk, right? He not only had a message about gay rights, but also an economic one, and Hillary hem-hawing on $15 min. wage is not enough when compared to Trump's promises of bringing back the coal jobs. Can he bring back the jobs? Probably not. But, don't pretend you're the champion of the people because you're willing to give them $13/hour min. wage (which, by the way, is $26k/year. How many y'all make $26k/year? Meanwhile, Krugman is perplexed from his penthouse on Park Ave.)
The fact that the majority of the stimulus following the recession was in tax credits and other trickle down economics is proof of how Dems cave on economic matters but fight like lions on social ones.
No one's saying abandon Gay Rights, for example, but be more like Saint Harvey Milk, right? He not only had a message about gay rights, but also an economic one, and Hillary hem-hawing on $15 min. wage is not enough when compared to Trump's promises of bringing back the coal jobs. Can he bring back the jobs? Probably not. But, don't pretend you're the champion of the people because you're willing to give them $13/hour min. wage (which, by the way, is $26k/year. How many y'all make $26k/year? Meanwhile, Krugman is perplexed from his penthouse on Park Ave.)
15
Mr. Krugman: Democrats should have no difficulty figuring out why the working classes have abandoned them. It's because the Democrats have neglected them over the last thirty years. For better understanding read "Political Fictions" by Joan Didion. Best Ed Spievack
14
If Jews have been unable to solve anti-semitism, it is going to be difficult for Democrats to solve racism. Let's start by identifying it: racism, misogynism, anti-semitism, anti-cosmopolitism. A second step would be including these people in a wider coalition by re-emphasizig unions, cultural out reach programs, marginalizing the sources of racist news like Fox, by consistently challenging them, in court, on the air waves. Tools of the racist right like Come need to be kept out of power when we have it, not misguidedly courted for some false notion of bi-partisanship when we are the only ones being bi-partisn. The deed having been done he needs to be fired.
4
I am wondering if Paul has read "Listen, Liberal" by Thomas Frank. The two of you could have an interesting debate on the subject of your column. I think there is the perception (which is not necessarily within a mile or two of reality) that Democrats are elites who don't care about regular working folks.
9
Dark money pushes Fox News and am radio on our country 24/7. This kind of false propaganda works. Outside of education I'm not sure what the country can do about this. It's as though a Nazi cadre controls a significant amount of our reporting media.
10
Dr. Krugman is here again with the implicit Bernie bashing.
And what's with this notion that Trump’s supporters voted for the Republicans?
And why oh why are the Times commentators once again falling back on blaming those ignorant, uncouth, lots.
Here we are, a week on, collectively demonstrating we have learned nothing, because of course, from our superior moral perch, we don't need to.
And what's with this notion that Trump’s supporters voted for the Republicans?
And why oh why are the Times commentators once again falling back on blaming those ignorant, uncouth, lots.
Here we are, a week on, collectively demonstrating we have learned nothing, because of course, from our superior moral perch, we don't need to.
11
if you add up the racists and sexists and xenophobes and religious bigots and those who have no idea how government works or who is responsible for anything, you will have a big chunk of Trump's support. They wanted an autocrat to do their dirty work. Add those who reflexively vote Republican -- despite their financial status -- and those who just wanted to poke government in the eye for a change, and you get a plurality.
The majority lost.
The majority lost.
6
So, if Dem policies are better for the white working class, what happened? Your candidate failed to make this case in her campaign. Her campaign, not her website, was largely Trump is not qualified, I am because I'm not Trump. Add to that her too frequent cheering of identity groups and then her basket of irredeemable deplorables comment and voila. It wasn't Comey, Krugman. It was Hillary's campaign and you failed to call her on it when you should have done. What can be done now? Ban the name calling for starters. The R's will overreach, won't they? Maybe an apology to a large group is in order. Then, when the overreach occurs, your arms will be open not closed.
11
If 64M of us are right and 62M of us are wrong, and Trump should not be president today, then our best hope is that he mucks things so badly that it's a repeat of the wave election in 2008. The sad thing is just how short our collective memory is. That plus we elected an orange con man with zero political experience as our president.
5
Is it dreaming to imagine that intensive thinking about public programs and policy, thinking like that of the scientist in the lab, will before too long become attractive -- even a joy --to millions of voters? Young voters who've been exposed to great teachers, I suppose I'm supposing. Dream on, you'll tell me?
2
Sorry, Dr. Krugman. You've lost the right to complain about this election. It's amazing to me how quickly you went from one of the brightest economic minds on the Left to an apologist for Clintonism and a stalwart critic of the Sanders wing of the Party. If you are your publication had not worked so hard to demolish the Sanders phenomenon America would have seen armies of millennials knocking on doors in states like Michigan and Wisconsin to shore up the vote. Instead, most of the millennials stayed home, updated their SnapChat feeds and ignored the work that needed to be done to win.
Look, type up all the extended analysis you want, the truth is that Clinton did not have the energy on the ground to win this election. Sanders would have had that energy, that grass-roots movement to sweep him to the White House. While you and this publication were calling for moderation in the face of extremism, some of us were looking for our own form of the passionate Left to make a real fight of it.
You missed the point then and you miss the point now. I would humbly suggest you close some of those economics texts and get out amongst the people before you write another column telling us how to think.
Look, type up all the extended analysis you want, the truth is that Clinton did not have the energy on the ground to win this election. Sanders would have had that energy, that grass-roots movement to sweep him to the White House. While you and this publication were calling for moderation in the face of extremism, some of us were looking for our own form of the passionate Left to make a real fight of it.
You missed the point then and you miss the point now. I would humbly suggest you close some of those economics texts and get out amongst the people before you write another column telling us how to think.
29
Thank you, Mark, for this brilliant comment. Krugman's cluelessness was evident in his blog posting a couple months before the election, in which he declared that everything seemed to be going great in Riverside Park, so he didn't understand why so many people in this country were so upset.
14
Mr. Krugman is as clueless as other old-guard left-liberals who fail to fault Clinton and her campaign for their loss. It WAS about identity politics -- didn't Krugman see the endless TV appearances Clinton made on the campaign trail openly courting the minority vote, especially African-Americans? She and her campaign was so blatant in its bias to embrace minorities and "suburban" (read, not rural Midwestern) women because they figured that would be her electorate, ignoring the lower- and lower-middle class whites (many of whom voted for her husband and Obama) who are hurting for lack of income -- and this election year, attention from Democrats. But, unfortunately, left-liberals like Krugman remain unable to admit that the Clinton campaigners used scare tactics of their own to maximize votes from blacks and Hispanics while utterly failing to campaign directly on behalf of all people of all races on the basis of economic class. It was hers to lose, she blew it and many left-liberals are still in denial about why.
12
Professor Krugman may be leaving out a major part of what drives people to vote against their best interests: The power of propaganda.
I'm no sociologist, but just look at who these people are listening to for decades, master rabble-rousers spouting absolute lies & made-up scandal. Complete fictions propagated by a media wing.
It's no news that the strategy to co-opt megachurch Christians by fusing their 'conservative' faith with the 'conservative' economic theory & the 'conservative' militaristic, american exceptionalism mythology, the Southern Strategy dog whistlers, etc. created a vast voting block that supports the red state agenda. That bloc seems to be the core of the half of voters who sustain the redstate electoral force, the backbone of the Trump support. It doesn't take a big swing to decide the US destiny.
Mr. Sanders has insight into what happened & why. I haven't read his book, but he's actually been there, talked to & visited the red state electorate.
Mr. Krugman's distaste for Mr. Sanders was a clearly activist voice against his candidacy, but it's clear that Bernie was the democrat who actually understood & appealed to the swing of votes among the so-called 'white working class' in rust/bible/belt USA, and feels their fear:
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=XvGp2AYpPkg
I'm no sociologist, but just look at who these people are listening to for decades, master rabble-rousers spouting absolute lies & made-up scandal. Complete fictions propagated by a media wing.
It's no news that the strategy to co-opt megachurch Christians by fusing their 'conservative' faith with the 'conservative' economic theory & the 'conservative' militaristic, american exceptionalism mythology, the Southern Strategy dog whistlers, etc. created a vast voting block that supports the red state agenda. That bloc seems to be the core of the half of voters who sustain the redstate electoral force, the backbone of the Trump support. It doesn't take a big swing to decide the US destiny.
Mr. Sanders has insight into what happened & why. I haven't read his book, but he's actually been there, talked to & visited the red state electorate.
Mr. Krugman's distaste for Mr. Sanders was a clearly activist voice against his candidacy, but it's clear that Bernie was the democrat who actually understood & appealed to the swing of votes among the so-called 'white working class' in rust/bible/belt USA, and feels their fear:
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=XvGp2AYpPkg
7
Krugman points out that disdain that is the problem for white working class getting on board with Democrats and liberal/progressives in general is the disdain that the right-wing, (with right-wing media, first, and then increasingly with lawmakers).
However there is a disdain going on that he fails to see, not about those on the left disdaining the white working class (that happens too, and that's just team players-animosity effect) -- but, what this is really about (from my perspective) were loyal Democrats, first for Hillary, disdainful of those, fellow liberals of differening viewpoints. A little more flexibility and open-mindedness and a lot less condescension plus guilt-trip-as-talking-point would have gone a whole lot further towards winning over those who didn't vote HIllary. And, also those of us who did -- for we were were resentful voters.
Not that we didn't see Clinton's progressive accomplishments, strengths and potentials, but we rightly saw from the start that 2016 was a populist moment in history. We rightly saw that it was transparent to all (even supporters) that HRC was the DNC establishment pick, shrewdly taking on Bernie's messages (and a few proposals) to secure those voters. That didn't happen as planned -- because there was no energy in that, and we kept point that out all the way through.
Populism happens of its own, you can manipulate it (thanks Trump) , however, you don't throw more or less populism at an election -- to paraphrase Daddy Bush.
However there is a disdain going on that he fails to see, not about those on the left disdaining the white working class (that happens too, and that's just team players-animosity effect) -- but, what this is really about (from my perspective) were loyal Democrats, first for Hillary, disdainful of those, fellow liberals of differening viewpoints. A little more flexibility and open-mindedness and a lot less condescension plus guilt-trip-as-talking-point would have gone a whole lot further towards winning over those who didn't vote HIllary. And, also those of us who did -- for we were were resentful voters.
Not that we didn't see Clinton's progressive accomplishments, strengths and potentials, but we rightly saw from the start that 2016 was a populist moment in history. We rightly saw that it was transparent to all (even supporters) that HRC was the DNC establishment pick, shrewdly taking on Bernie's messages (and a few proposals) to secure those voters. That didn't happen as planned -- because there was no energy in that, and we kept point that out all the way through.
Populism happens of its own, you can manipulate it (thanks Trump) , however, you don't throw more or less populism at an election -- to paraphrase Daddy Bush.
3
1 / Pushkin predicted why so many voted for Trump this year: "The illusion that exalts is dearer to us than 10,000 truths.” Trump went for the amygdala; Clinton the left brain. One target is much smaller yet powerful enough, it seems.
2 / Sanders is calling for more class-consciousness as a substitution for more race-consciousness. It's a good idea, as a society we confuse the two to the detriment to anybody in the bottom 50%. Race-politics are designed, of course, to keep the white working & lower classes compliant and grateful for the crumbs their OverLords supply.
2 / Sanders is calling for more class-consciousness as a substitution for more race-consciousness. It's a good idea, as a society we confuse the two to the detriment to anybody in the bottom 50%. Race-politics are designed, of course, to keep the white working & lower classes compliant and grateful for the crumbs their OverLords supply.
13
Mr. Krugman, I believe it is most time for you and the Times to bring to light the situation in France leading up to and including the aftermath of their 1936 Prime Minister election.
And write of Leon Blum and his coalition of the myriad left wing support of innumerous organizations called the Popular Front.
Fascists Hitler and Mussolini, as well as the Imperial Government of Japan, were firmly in place. The right wing and fascists of France were doing all things possible to win and take over the French Government.
The Popular Front led by Leon Blum won the election and to throw water all over Hitler, Leon Blum is of the Jewish Faith.
Prime Minister Blum's brilliance of amassing facts and speak sans notes, a vast and immense oratory skill and his belief in the French Equality, Liberty and Fraternity, his morality of goodness transformed France's economic structure and reduced the mass inequality that is so prevalent in our country presently.
He won for France the 40 hour work week and paid vacations, that for the first time in France's history, allowed the working class to travel and to visit family members that had been impossible to reunite.
In the greatest presence of his morality, goodness and his courage to over come the consequences of defending his positions, came during a trial that the Petain Vichy government charged him as leader of democratic socialism, Leon Blum was the cause of France's collapse and defeat by the German's.
Study this mans life.
And write of Leon Blum and his coalition of the myriad left wing support of innumerous organizations called the Popular Front.
Fascists Hitler and Mussolini, as well as the Imperial Government of Japan, were firmly in place. The right wing and fascists of France were doing all things possible to win and take over the French Government.
The Popular Front led by Leon Blum won the election and to throw water all over Hitler, Leon Blum is of the Jewish Faith.
Prime Minister Blum's brilliance of amassing facts and speak sans notes, a vast and immense oratory skill and his belief in the French Equality, Liberty and Fraternity, his morality of goodness transformed France's economic structure and reduced the mass inequality that is so prevalent in our country presently.
He won for France the 40 hour work week and paid vacations, that for the first time in France's history, allowed the working class to travel and to visit family members that had been impossible to reunite.
In the greatest presence of his morality, goodness and his courage to over come the consequences of defending his positions, came during a trial that the Petain Vichy government charged him as leader of democratic socialism, Leon Blum was the cause of France's collapse and defeat by the German's.
Study this mans life.
4
The right attempted to assassinate Leon Blum. He survived with a minor head injury
1
Who, exactly, is the last non-college-educated white unemployed factory worker (what an elitist term!) that Krugman had a chat with? My guess is he never has. They all reside outside his bubble.
And, see, that's the problem. Here we have an elitist telling the other elitists what they did wrong. He knows this by simply staring at his navel. He never actually talked to the people he is condemning.
Which is basically how his gal Hillary also ran her campaign: Hobnobbing with other elitists and defending the status quo. Voting against their own self interests? Why would any out of work factory worker vote for the Queen of NAFTA? Krugman has no idea how the Clintons are hated in the Rust Belt or why.
He still thinks ObamaCare is a wonderful thing! Has he talked to anyone here in Arizona whose premiums are going up more than 100 percent this year? No wonder folks here didn't want another four years of a Democratic presidency.
Krugman has had this entire election cycle wrong, starting with his Bernie bashing.
And, see, that's the problem. Here we have an elitist telling the other elitists what they did wrong. He knows this by simply staring at his navel. He never actually talked to the people he is condemning.
Which is basically how his gal Hillary also ran her campaign: Hobnobbing with other elitists and defending the status quo. Voting against their own self interests? Why would any out of work factory worker vote for the Queen of NAFTA? Krugman has no idea how the Clintons are hated in the Rust Belt or why.
He still thinks ObamaCare is a wonderful thing! Has he talked to anyone here in Arizona whose premiums are going up more than 100 percent this year? No wonder folks here didn't want another four years of a Democratic presidency.
Krugman has had this entire election cycle wrong, starting with his Bernie bashing.
18
The answer is simply that race drove this election. The Civil War is not over.
9
Dr. Krugman, you seem to be a bit behind the curve on this one. Maybe you should read more of the many interviews with Trump voters. Trump is a successful Republican businessman who is shaking things up and who will fight harder to get economic opportunities for them. (And if you say that he’s not a real Republican or that he’s not really successful, that’s only explaining your own vote). Hillary Clinton probably understands economics better than Trump, but she’s a career politician with too many other messages besides the economic one.
As for the Affordable Care Act-I have worked in health care and I understand the economics, but I currently have a marketplace policy and my premiums for next year are increasing by more than 50%. When you are seven years into a major new program and this happens, how can you argue with people who say this program is a failure? Neither Obama, nor Hillary, nor anyone else in the Democratic party has been able to sell this program to the American people. I’m not sure that they have even really tried. So what does that say about the appeal of ‘progressive’ policies?
As for the Affordable Care Act-I have worked in health care and I understand the economics, but I currently have a marketplace policy and my premiums for next year are increasing by more than 50%. When you are seven years into a major new program and this happens, how can you argue with people who say this program is a failure? Neither Obama, nor Hillary, nor anyone else in the Democratic party has been able to sell this program to the American people. I’m not sure that they have even really tried. So what does that say about the appeal of ‘progressive’ policies?
5
It hasn't helped that the Republicans used every weapon available to destroy the ACA.
They don't want something better to replace it. They don't care about the country. They are motivated by greed and selfishness.
They believe that money is for rich people.
They don't want something better to replace it. They don't care about the country. They are motivated by greed and selfishness.
They believe that money is for rich people.
3
If you want to understand Trump's appeal to the white working class, ask union officials. Every time I head them quoted in the news, they said that a lot of their members liked both Trump and Sanders. Out in the country where I live now, redneck ranchers liked Sanders. They thought he meant what said and said what he meant.
11
We Democrats need a message that sells to the average white wage earner. (And why Mrs. Clinton and the good professor have not said this is beyond me.)
Jobs. Jobs. Jobs.
And policies that obviously help the minimum wage earning white, Wal-Mart worker and at the same time are easy to understand:
No large company (say over 100 workers) will be allowed to have less than 80% of their employees as full-time, 40-hour-per-week jobs with benefits like paid vacations AND a $15 per hour minimum wage.
All 40 hour per week jobs will have two consecutive days off per week. A real weekend for the wage earner. And those jobs cannot be split shifts or less than 8 hours per day. Overtime is paid for work over 40 hours per week.
Even I could win an election with that simple, honest message to those who really toil for an HOURLY living.
Spin that how you like, FBI director Comey.
Jobs. Jobs. Jobs.
And policies that obviously help the minimum wage earning white, Wal-Mart worker and at the same time are easy to understand:
No large company (say over 100 workers) will be allowed to have less than 80% of their employees as full-time, 40-hour-per-week jobs with benefits like paid vacations AND a $15 per hour minimum wage.
All 40 hour per week jobs will have two consecutive days off per week. A real weekend for the wage earner. And those jobs cannot be split shifts or less than 8 hours per day. Overtime is paid for work over 40 hours per week.
Even I could win an election with that simple, honest message to those who really toil for an HOURLY living.
Spin that how you like, FBI director Comey.
3
I'm not sure why Mr Krugman would pick a Clay County, Ky, a very red county in a very red state, to make your point. Clay County doesn't vote democrat. It hasn't voted democrat in the past 20 years, and I suspect many election cycles prior to that. In trying to refute Mr Sanders, why didn't he use a representative sample from the rust belt states, states that traditionally voted democrat and flip this election like Michigan, Ohio and Pennsylvania?
Democratic Representative Matt Cartwright was re-elected in blue-collar Scranton, Pennsylvania, with about 54 percent of the vote. About 40,000 Trump voters crossed over to back him. His number 1 appeal to his constituency? What he would do get back jobs. Recalling Bill Clinton campaign theme, "It's the economy stupid."
I suspect Mr Krugman's argument against Mr Sander's would lose much of it's steam if the focus was there instead of in an Appalachian Southern coal county.
Democratic Representative Matt Cartwright was re-elected in blue-collar Scranton, Pennsylvania, with about 54 percent of the vote. About 40,000 Trump voters crossed over to back him. His number 1 appeal to his constituency? What he would do get back jobs. Recalling Bill Clinton campaign theme, "It's the economy stupid."
I suspect Mr Krugman's argument against Mr Sander's would lose much of it's steam if the focus was there instead of in an Appalachian Southern coal county.
7
I love Dr. Krugman's economic analyses. They make so much sense.
But, IMHO, on this issue he is as lost as the Dems.
Yes, the Dems have all the issues on their side. But the messaging is REALLY terrible. People will not flock to a "better mouse trap". One has to market it, sell the heck out of it. That is what the GOP does. And that is why their half-truths and total lies sell so well. Look what happened to Hillary. The GOP often used the "comes with so much baggage" rubbish. And the press just picked it up, never mentioning the "baggage" came from the GOP and the press, never mentioning there has been near zero evidence of any kind.
Dr. Krugman mentions health insurance. IMHO, the Dems should be out NOW banging the drum on Medicare for All, which is cheaper, better, and covers more people than Obamacare. It simply does not matter that there is no Congressional support, little public awareness or anything else. If that is what one wants, one starts screaming for it NOW, and when one does not get it, one still screams for it. Start a twitter storm. Start a Facebook campaign. Have every Dem who gets on TV push it. And do not ever shut up about it.
The Dems need to do their own propaganda, and not rely on the media. And they need to do their propaganda 365 days a year and in all 50 states.
But they won't.
But, IMHO, on this issue he is as lost as the Dems.
Yes, the Dems have all the issues on their side. But the messaging is REALLY terrible. People will not flock to a "better mouse trap". One has to market it, sell the heck out of it. That is what the GOP does. And that is why their half-truths and total lies sell so well. Look what happened to Hillary. The GOP often used the "comes with so much baggage" rubbish. And the press just picked it up, never mentioning the "baggage" came from the GOP and the press, never mentioning there has been near zero evidence of any kind.
Dr. Krugman mentions health insurance. IMHO, the Dems should be out NOW banging the drum on Medicare for All, which is cheaper, better, and covers more people than Obamacare. It simply does not matter that there is no Congressional support, little public awareness or anything else. If that is what one wants, one starts screaming for it NOW, and when one does not get it, one still screams for it. Start a twitter storm. Start a Facebook campaign. Have every Dem who gets on TV push it. And do not ever shut up about it.
The Dems need to do their own propaganda, and not rely on the media. And they need to do their propaganda 365 days a year and in all 50 states.
But they won't.
4
So the whites built this country (with an assist from AfricanAmericans) and will now lay the seeds for its destruction?
2
I've been reading and enjoying your stuff for years.
But let me suggest that Democrats need to go beyond identity politics at least in part as a matter of tone and attitude. Working class folks of any race, like everyone else, need to know how they will provide for themselves and their families. But many working class folks of any race, like almost anyone else, also need to know how their lives fit within the context of a meaningful life lived as a member of a family or community. This does not imply that economic policy is unimportant.
You compare working class fury at imagined liberal disdain with lesser fury directed at very real conservative disdain. Liberal disdain is not imaginary. Read the articles in the NYT since the election regarding identity politics, and accompanying reader comments. Read Vanessa Barbara's feminist meditation on names for nail polishes, just now published by your newspaper though it's a retro bit of unreconstructed simplistic male bashing that seems ripped from the pages of an eighties or nineties American magazine. Note especially her last paragraph.
Liberal disdain is real and is perceived by the working classes.
But let me suggest that Democrats need to go beyond identity politics at least in part as a matter of tone and attitude. Working class folks of any race, like everyone else, need to know how they will provide for themselves and their families. But many working class folks of any race, like almost anyone else, also need to know how their lives fit within the context of a meaningful life lived as a member of a family or community. This does not imply that economic policy is unimportant.
You compare working class fury at imagined liberal disdain with lesser fury directed at very real conservative disdain. Liberal disdain is not imaginary. Read the articles in the NYT since the election regarding identity politics, and accompanying reader comments. Read Vanessa Barbara's feminist meditation on names for nail polishes, just now published by your newspaper though it's a retro bit of unreconstructed simplistic male bashing that seems ripped from the pages of an eighties or nineties American magazine. Note especially her last paragraph.
Liberal disdain is real and is perceived by the working classes.
11
If Democrats want to attract Trump voters, and many other disinterested voters, they should begin by blowing up the gravy train between Democratic candidates and big corporate donors.
12
Ah, jeez, Krugman. HRC lost because she was unliked and untrusted by well more than half the electorate. She had no new policies of her own and those she put forward were largely warmed-over Bernie notions. She urged us to accept and like a pitiful half-loaf, along with more of the same ol' that got us to this point.
This began roughly 35 years ago when Bill Clinton sold the DNC on 'third way' nitwittery, turning the party away from FDR-style progressivism into rethuglican-lite. This managed not only to ignore working people but spurn them. Sen. Obama's 'clinging to God and guns' comments to HRC's "basket of deplorables" -spoken to the high-rollers she kowtowed before- showed just the kind of out-of-touch politics the party embraced along the way.
You're flailing. The sooner you get over this, the sooner the party can attempt a resurrection. And it will be one worthy of Lazarus, should it pull it off.
This began roughly 35 years ago when Bill Clinton sold the DNC on 'third way' nitwittery, turning the party away from FDR-style progressivism into rethuglican-lite. This managed not only to ignore working people but spurn them. Sen. Obama's 'clinging to God and guns' comments to HRC's "basket of deplorables" -spoken to the high-rollers she kowtowed before- showed just the kind of out-of-touch politics the party embraced along the way.
You're flailing. The sooner you get over this, the sooner the party can attempt a resurrection. And it will be one worthy of Lazarus, should it pull it off.
14
Democrats already know why Trump won the Rust Belt. He told working class voters lies that they wanted to believe. Democrats of course need counter-stories of their own. What they haven't yet figured out is whether the new Democratic stories will be truthful. This will be a fateful decision.
4
The voters who tipped the Electoral College scales (heroically assuming the vote counting was on the up and up in Mich/Wis/Penn) wanted a departure from the status quo. Trump and Sanders represented that. HRC did not.
5
At some point Mr. Krugman may have to admit part of the issue is that he sees it all wrong. He feels that the Dems have been championing winning policies yet on the field of play(which is real life and death to the people we are talking about) their policies haven't won anything for the working class. It's all chatter. Perhaps its time the NYT gave him a rest for a bit. He has nothing new to add to the conversation at this point. He sounds like a broken record trying to convince us all the sky is fluorescent green.
7
What made Trump's campaign so successful is that Trump didn't just promise economic good times for the poorest in America. He promised economic good times for only the poorest white people in America. Blacks, Latinos, Muslims and any non-Christians including Jews and the LGBTQ community (who cannot be Christian because of their "sinful" sexuality), were to be punished. They would be punished by deportation, by watch lists and by the loss of those undeserved benefits that allowed them to live the high life at the expense of deserving white people.
It is extremely easy to see that as much as many voters hoped jobs would come back to their area thanks to Trump's amazing business expertise, just as many hoped that the non-white people who have been destroying their lives would be punished at the same time.
Trump's strategy was the Southern Strategy writ large ... and it worked. It will continue to work as long as the resentment of these people continues to be fed. You don't have to deliver a single job, or even increase the minimum wage. You don't have to provide health insurance or breathable air and drinkable water. You just have to keep telling these people that - eventually - you will punish the "other" for the ills they are suffering. It's worked for decades. Why shouldn't it continue to work now.
It is extremely easy to see that as much as many voters hoped jobs would come back to their area thanks to Trump's amazing business expertise, just as many hoped that the non-white people who have been destroying their lives would be punished at the same time.
Trump's strategy was the Southern Strategy writ large ... and it worked. It will continue to work as long as the resentment of these people continues to be fed. You don't have to deliver a single job, or even increase the minimum wage. You don't have to provide health insurance or breathable air and drinkable water. You just have to keep telling these people that - eventually - you will punish the "other" for the ills they are suffering. It's worked for decades. Why shouldn't it continue to work now.
2
When it comes to policy, I have always admired the principled approach that GOP politicians employ in their economic decision making. The principles: (1) competition guarantees balance among all market factors, including prices, wages, rents, job availability, etc.; (2) nonetheless, private monopolies--too-big-to-fail enterprises--are preferable to government regulation of the market; (3) the chief ethical duty of corporations is to enhance shareholder value, and success in doing so should be the chief justification for increased executive salaries, stock options and other bonuses; (4) if it is politically necessary to put a public-private initiative in place--say for healthcare reform or infrastructure repair--make sure the initiative is complex, and insures the socialization of all risks and the privatization of all benefits; (5) always exaggerate the dangers associated with government debt and minimize those accompanying all ballooning private sector debt.
The GOP politicians' adherence to these principles coincidentally guarantees the ever further enrichment of the GOP donor class--those who, once the debt bubbles burst, are themselves best positioned to buy up the better parts of the debris at discounted prices.
Can't someone inform the uninformed working-class voters as to what they are actually getting when they vote for Republican candidates?
Or is the problem that so many neoliberal Dems endorse very similar principles and, therefore, cannot speak against them?
The GOP politicians' adherence to these principles coincidentally guarantees the ever further enrichment of the GOP donor class--those who, once the debt bubbles burst, are themselves best positioned to buy up the better parts of the debris at discounted prices.
Can't someone inform the uninformed working-class voters as to what they are actually getting when they vote for Republican candidates?
Or is the problem that so many neoliberal Dems endorse very similar principles and, therefore, cannot speak against them?
9
The danger is trying to analyze this election from a rational viewpoint. The white working class definitely voted against their best interests, economic and otherwise and on the face of it, it would seem irrational. Undoubtedly some if not many are racist to some degree but a better explanation is ignorance. Ignorance allows many to believe Trumps statements which overall were about 85% lies per most reliable fact checkers. I don't think that anyone can overestimate the effect of Fox News in contributing to this ignorance. Fox News is about the same percentage lies although perhaps slightly better camouflaged. When a political party basically has its own propaganda instrument firmly embedded in daily life it is a tremendous advantage. There isn't too much you can do to combat ignorance except education, which is a slow process. When an ignorant majority behaves irrationally bad things will happen. It will take a big shock to get them to readjust their thinking. The big shock will come and hopefully it won't be fatal to democracy and the nation.
5
neither was the bombing of Dresden, but it was no picnic, either.
1
The professor is looking for something beyond racism, resentment and hatred magnified by the Internet to explain Trumpism -- but that's all there is.
Poor white trash can now see how the educated class lives and resentment burn, while white supremacists use the Internet to spread lies and fuel hatred. And Facebook and Google get rich, as they deny any responsibility.
Look. These people would bring slavery back if they could. But they'll settle for bringing back Jim Crow and lynching.
Sadly, it's going to get a lot worse before it gets better. Anyone putting their hopes on protests, the mid-term elections, or Trump's voters turning against him because the mine hasn't opened yet is not paying attention.
Poor white trash can now see how the educated class lives and resentment burn, while white supremacists use the Internet to spread lies and fuel hatred. And Facebook and Google get rich, as they deny any responsibility.
Look. These people would bring slavery back if they could. But they'll settle for bringing back Jim Crow and lynching.
Sadly, it's going to get a lot worse before it gets better. Anyone putting their hopes on protests, the mid-term elections, or Trump's voters turning against him because the mine hasn't opened yet is not paying attention.
5
This article, and many of the comments here make it quite clear what Democrats (if they are to be the Party representing progressive values) need to do. The reality is that the white working class feels disempowered, and they resent it. It doesn't really matter why they feel disempowered, although there are many good reasons that they do so. The important lesson to be drawn is that 1) Democrats need to understand the resentment, 2) they need to do some serious work on developing the narratives that resonate with the white working class, and 3) they need to find a megaphone for reaching them. Point 3, in particular, will be difficult given that the Main Stream Media is not much help, but it is essential - without it, the progressive movement, whether in the hands of the Democrats or not, will fail.
4
PK's "reasons for doubt" amount to a rehash of his arguments in the Democratic primary. (So, unfortunately, does Sanders' rejection of a trivialized version of "identity politics.")
An electorate that votes for change on any terms is fickle. If or when Trump fails, they will turn against him. Democrats need to ready with a better alternative than the incremental one they provided this past election.
The electoral-college electorate embraced some part of the populist message. Time to figure out which parts to keep, not to dismiss populism wholesale. Sanders is right: taking a courageous stand against economic power is a good place to start...
An electorate that votes for change on any terms is fickle. If or when Trump fails, they will turn against him. Democrats need to ready with a better alternative than the incremental one they provided this past election.
The electoral-college electorate embraced some part of the populist message. Time to figure out which parts to keep, not to dismiss populism wholesale. Sanders is right: taking a courageous stand against economic power is a good place to start...
A new form of social segregation is emerging in which people are clustered virtually by a set of static factors. News, opinions are exchanged and reinforced within each cluster. The serendipity of social exchanges in physical world is losing its signal power. Facts can be perceived differently in such segregated clusters. We have just witnessed how difficult it can be for people from different clusters to engage in meaningful exchanges of opinions. This is only beginning. It is time to pay some attention to the possiblr social consequences of mass produced "customization".
1
When we look at the state that the Democratic Party is in, it is easy to be depressed. They lost the Presidency and the Congress, and republicans control about 30 of the state governments. That means that republicans will control redistricting in those states after the next census and can continue the gerrymander of the U. S. House of Representatives.
But I am optimistic for most of the country in general. If you look at the election map, the blue states represent the future. It is not an accident that Silicon valley is in California. The economy has a life of its own and the people who can deal with the changing economy will do well; those that can't deal with the changing economy won't do well. Clay County will continue to be a depressed area regardless of who is elected President.
But I am optimistic for most of the country in general. If you look at the election map, the blue states represent the future. It is not an accident that Silicon valley is in California. The economy has a life of its own and the people who can deal with the changing economy will do well; those that can't deal with the changing economy won't do well. Clay County will continue to be a depressed area regardless of who is elected President.
1
The right-wing propaganda apparatus (Fox News, Limbaugh, Drudge, Breitbart, etc.) is the key reason so many Republicans persistently vote against their own interests. The left has no matching apparatus because liberals aren't as fearful as their counterparts on the right. On the right they simply scare people about liberalism, crime, minorities, terrorism, socialism, illegal immigrants, "inner cities," Syrian refugees, late-term abortions, the government, the liberal media and so forth (the list goes on and on). Fear mongering trumps enlightenment, especially when the public lacks critical thinking skills.
6
In this election cycle, we saw populism surge -- both the faux populism of Trump and the genuine populism of Sanders. The Democratic establishment, with the help of journalists like Krugman, colluded to successfully crush Sanders movement in order to corronate an unpopular status quo establishment candidate. The result is disastrous. Krugman should apologize for his role in this debacle
8
I totally concur with Paul Krugman. What won the fools to T-rumpism was the false promises. The folks sucked it all in, hook, line and sinker. I don't want the Dems to take this course. The media might be responsible for not pointing the "false" promises and its results. Oh, I forgot, it would have to be faux news.
2
If you do not fully understand this resentment, do your writing on a road trip through coal country, through the rust belt, through Arizona trailer parks. Use the words misogynist, homophone, racist - then listen to what people are really worried about: food, shelter, their kids, their schools. Democrats do more for these folks but fail in connecting the dots, in speaking plain talk. Writing this from Silicon Valley but with a lens towards growing up in inner city Philly.
10
The racial overtones of this election were fanned by both sides. Hillary spouted diversification until she was blue in the face and Trumpery took the populist course..."make America great again" which emphasized the demise of white supremacy and middle class.
The real issue, of course, is lack of white middle class jobs that are going away because of automation and trade agreements with unforeseen consequences.
If you can believe Trumpery, and you cannot, he will restore what is not restorable. Automation is ongoing, the trade agreements are not going away without tremendous disruption of existing workflows.
The real issue, of course, is lack of white middle class jobs that are going away because of automation and trade agreements with unforeseen consequences.
If you can believe Trumpery, and you cannot, he will restore what is not restorable. Automation is ongoing, the trade agreements are not going away without tremendous disruption of existing workflows.
1
The one perceptive statement in this column comes in the next-to-last paragraph:
"To be honest, I don't fully understand this resentment."
Right, professor. Get off the campus. Go talk to people. They're easy to find. You might learn something.
"To be honest, I don't fully understand this resentment."
Right, professor. Get off the campus. Go talk to people. They're easy to find. You might learn something.
5
It's too narrow a focus to look just at coal mining: there's plenty of other factors involved, one important one being that no bankers went to jail for the 2008 crash, and more recently Well Fargo's obvious fraud, for which workers were fired but the CEO resigns with a big parachute. Steve Jobs once said, "perception IS reality". The perception is that the system is rigged, and Hillary did nothing that would counter that perception.
5
To me we are talking about the people who have been left out of the American dream these are the people who could only get a portion of jobs and who were laid off regularly after working for a couple of years everything they worked for those two years what down the toilet and they started over again. These are my parentsyes they were not very well educated but not because they were done but because the schools were rigged to take care of the brightest people and feed these people mediocre stuff that change it to turn them into wage slaves I was a social worker and watch and George when did BOP plant shutdown the people who had worked on the assembly orange with that BOP plan for years were reduced to poverty and food stamps they would come into the office for Shane and hate this is who voted for Donald Trump
"what can Democrats do to win back at least some of those voters?" Wait for them to realize Lying Donald lied to them. It won't take long. Trump is nothing if not consistent in using lying to get his way. Unfortunately the Trump suckers will have to wait four years unless the republicans impeach and convict him. But the republicans love their new front man. As long as he doesn't get in the way of their building a libertarian nirvana, AKA tanking the economy, we are stuck with the Liar in Chief.
3
How can Trump make something great again that was never great in the first place? Great Britain should be called Britain because it isn't and never was Great either. I's pompous arrogance to claim greatness by any country.
1
It's not surprising Mr. Krugman is confused. He not only held disdain for Bernie's economic plan but in his commitment to HRC's continuation of austerity towards the working class seems to be behind his pivot from identity politics to an effort to question voting against one's interest. The New Dems shut the door on the working class three decades ago. What propelled Trump was the "whitelash" that isn't buying it anymore. If Dems were listening to the public instead of high impact funders and Wall Street, Trump wouldn't be our reality.
7
There are many liberals who vote against their own economic interests (e.g. higher taxes), why shouldn't others do the same?
"You can lead a horse to water, but you can't get it to drink"
I think there's only two paths to the rebuilding of the Democratic Party from hereon out: One, start treating the Republican Party less like a political party and more like a cult (which it's essentially become over the last 10 years or so) and re-focus their efforts on educating and de-programming White working class people and explaining to them why voting Democrat is in their own best interest. Or two, accept the fact that there's some Americans for whom only "facts" espoused by Fox News and AM hate radio matter, and concentrate on increasing youth and minority turnout in elections; particularly, midterm elections.
I think there's only two paths to the rebuilding of the Democratic Party from hereon out: One, start treating the Republican Party less like a political party and more like a cult (which it's essentially become over the last 10 years or so) and re-focus their efforts on educating and de-programming White working class people and explaining to them why voting Democrat is in their own best interest. Or two, accept the fact that there's some Americans for whom only "facts" espoused by Fox News and AM hate radio matter, and concentrate on increasing youth and minority turnout in elections; particularly, midterm elections.
2
Precisely. IOW, Past vs. Future. The Republicans clearly own the past, even if it's nostalgia for a time that never was. The Democrats own the future: millennials, LGBT, Hispanics and other people of color. The past is done, the future is all we have.
3
I generally admire Krugman's essays, but not this one. He chooses to discuss an historically Republican county (the last Democrat elected to congress was in 1960; the last Democrat presidential candidate to take the county was in 1860, not a good year to be a Democrat), but with an historically high poverty rate, poor health, and a Congressman known for pork. More interesting is why historically Democrat counties, such as Eliot, switched to Trump. Further, after his synopsis of why the rust belt has rusted, Krugman offers improved minimum wages as a balm to loss of wages from the coal and other industries, but if that were the best Democrats could offer, that would be but freezing comfort. In fact, Clinton offered much more, but it didn't connect. The big question is why. I would not start with 'their' inability to see through Trump's bull. Was some of it rhetorical, such as Clinton's choice in her acceptance speech to mention an extensive list of groups but, with silent emphasis, not the white working class? Did her emphasis on retraining seem will-o-the-wisp to poorly educated workers in their 40's or 50's? It may be that the only hope of wage recovery for these people is a raised minimum wage, but what politician is going to win with that message? Democrats can do better, and they should.
5
Thank you Mr. Krugman. At last, someone taking on the myth that if we just stop with the so-called identity politics, people will come together, poor whites having a sudden illumination they have been played by the Kochs et al. Nah. First of all, why should it be a bunch of white people (a group of which I am a member) telling other groups, once again, what they should do. Talk about codescension. White liberals have embraced people like JD Vance who feed this myth that poor whites are not racist, they just love the grand old flag and feel so displaced blah blah blah. Never mind that they embrace a long tradition of scorning science in favor of what the Bible teaches, and that their interpretation of said bible is that the earth is 6000 years old, that whites were meant to be kept separate from other races, etc. The real problem is active hostility to education, ingrained bigotry, and good ol American anti intellectualism. Talk about identity politics...Americans always wonder why other countries seem to be better at education .Maybe it is because other countries actually value education, learning, and intellectual achievement and don't celebrate ignorance as a great national trait.
4
While certainly some part of it, there was a lot more going on than uneducated Midwest white folk acting out for nostalgia. Having elected Obama twice, this election was not about sexist voters being unwilling to elect a woman; rather they were unwilling to elect *that* woman. The outcome was not caused by or dependent on Comey’s supposed thumb on the scales, although it is likely that enough Democratic and Republican voters were uncomfortable with electing a candidate who could lead the nation into a constitutional crisis. This was a Brexit-like election: With their votes, many Amnericans shouted to government, politicians, federal bureaucracy and media, “You’re not listening to us!” Post election, it’s not clear they’re ready to listen.
2
It dawns on me Trump was the embodiment of right wing talk radio. We who hear the so-called conservative but more neo-nazi rants, quickly change the station, not believing anyone with an active cortex would give them a moment. However, in my 37 years working with people in the woods, I would run into people for whom this was the gospel; regardless of any fact proving otherwise. From medical technicians, to linemen for the power company; Limbaugh,(his 3 marriages, drug addiction, obesity not withstanding) and his other talk radio hacks, speak to over 47 million listeners daily. Democrats, listen carefully. That is 47 Million every day, Monday through Friday, while driving to and from the job site, or all day in the garage, or repair facility, etc. all year long. What makes you think listeners even grasp a straw of reality after this perpetual brain washing? I'm sure our founders didn't envision this kind of "free speech" but it has ruined the America I grew up in since 1953. I occasionally run into these zombies at gatherings to hear how monies paid in taxes are stolen from them to feed the addictions of the poor: no connection with the community infrastructure they support. This with Fox news (which is propaganda, not news), unchecked, are no more than propaganda machines that worked so well for the nazis.
5
Yes, yes, yes, Mr. Krugman, but even if many white working class voters had availed themselves of economic analyses provided by mainstream sources, it's doubtful they would have taken it to heart after nearly forty years of seeing their incomes decline.
3
Unless neoliberals like Professor Krugman can acknowledge their own complicity in creating the conditions that led to Donald Trump, more Trumps will emerge. Wealth inequality, despair & rage -fueled by predatory capitalism- has given rise to Brexit, to neo-fascist parties throughout Europe, and to Donald Trump. Blaming Comey or Jill Stein or racism (or misogyny) only obscures the underlying reality that late-stage capitalism has sucked the marrow from the bones of most Americans. Unless we look at the structural underpinnings of our current crisis, we are headed to an even bleaker future.
12
I agree with you. It's naive to think that a majority of DJT voters made a rational decision. While there are surely those who would vote Republican no matter what, or decide on the basis of a single issue, evidence tells us otherwise: we have witnessed for over a year now a series of frightening public events, where attendees were encouraged to unleash their darkest thoughts. Bernie Sanders should know better than anyone what crowds are capable of. His own technique was on a par with Trump's: masses of people, whipped into a frenzy over a guy who promises everything, has done nothing, and could not connect one-on-one, especially with minority communities, and repeated himself endlessly. That there are still pockets of Sanders minions hanging around, offering over-the-top praise and adoration, is just plain creepy. If Sanders really cares for the people, he needs to stop telling the Democrats what to do and retreat to from whence he came.
2
Donald Trump sells air, and the naifs buy it. What a surprise it will be when unemployment goes up, the national debt balloons, and the economy takes it's usual slide under a Republicans administration.
Last week the Republicans were trumpeting the rebuilding of our infrastructure. Weren't those the very same Republicans who refused funding when President Obama took office and wanted to put people back to work rebuilding bridges and roads? Of course they were.
This is a con game, and the American people have allowed themselves to be conned. The con man in chief will be there to rape the country...a divergence for him.
Last week the Republicans were trumpeting the rebuilding of our infrastructure. Weren't those the very same Republicans who refused funding when President Obama took office and wanted to put people back to work rebuilding bridges and roads? Of course they were.
This is a con game, and the American people have allowed themselves to be conned. The con man in chief will be there to rape the country...a divergence for him.
2
Wow, over a thousand comments...hope I'm not repeating somebody else's words.
Dr. Krugman, this is an admirable rational attempt to explain the self-defeating vote of poor whites. But you have to go beyond rationality, as you do in your final paragraphs. It's very difficult for us fact-based geeks to do this. We need advice and perspectives from the salespeople, marketers and anthropologists.
Or look to history (though the driving forces are still irrational). As I understand it, there was a bond between the 19th-century English working classes and the Disraeli-led Tory governments, even though the Tories wanted to keep the lower orders in their defined place, no upward mobility needed. The extension of the vote to the lower classes was a gambit to get more Tory votes. The Tory rhetoric was all about queen and country and power and "the old ways." This sounds sadly familiar.
Dr. Krugman, this is an admirable rational attempt to explain the self-defeating vote of poor whites. But you have to go beyond rationality, as you do in your final paragraphs. It's very difficult for us fact-based geeks to do this. We need advice and perspectives from the salespeople, marketers and anthropologists.
Or look to history (though the driving forces are still irrational). As I understand it, there was a bond between the 19th-century English working classes and the Disraeli-led Tory governments, even though the Tories wanted to keep the lower orders in their defined place, no upward mobility needed. The extension of the vote to the lower classes was a gambit to get more Tory votes. The Tory rhetoric was all about queen and country and power and "the old ways." This sounds sadly familiar.
Mr. Krugman needs to see his doctor because he must early onset dementia to have written this column. He's still deriding Bernie Sanders very clear understanding of what happened in the election and why HRC and her neoliberal ideas failed to win--and yes, forget about the 2 million more votes, that's not how it works and if the Democratic party wanted to change that then they should have been working on it for the past 8 years.
I guess in his little ivory tower Mr. Krugman may not have ever seen poor people or the close to poor and the "uneducated" to understand how they have been suffering for the past 30+years under both Republican and Democratic leadership. To suggest the Republicans are worse is laughable because yes, of course they are, but so what? If the Democrats had really cared about the poor and working classes they would have pushed policies that helped them, especially after the 2008 economic crash when President Obama had a once in a generation chance to balance the scales but instead chose to again, support Wall Street and big business over the 99%. Shame on you Krugman.
T
I guess in his little ivory tower Mr. Krugman may not have ever seen poor people or the close to poor and the "uneducated" to understand how they have been suffering for the past 30+years under both Republican and Democratic leadership. To suggest the Republicans are worse is laughable because yes, of course they are, but so what? If the Democrats had really cared about the poor and working classes they would have pushed policies that helped them, especially after the 2008 economic crash when President Obama had a once in a generation chance to balance the scales but instead chose to again, support Wall Street and big business over the 99%. Shame on you Krugman.
T
3
A bit tone-deaf. Identity didn't play a role at all, and only divides and distracts the people while the clubbed ones cash in. Women didn't vote for Clinton. Blacks and Latinos barely made a mark for her. The one thing that Dr Krugman seems to have a bone to pick with is 'populism', and that the term applies to both Trump and Sanders. This is the 'false equivalency' that Dr. Krugman frequently rails against. Sanders was offering economically much of what Dr Krugman has advocated in the past. Why not offer to fight for it? That would have won. Clinton's half-loaf technocratic policies, embarrassingly empty identity-laden boosterism, and her baggage (remember when someone who previously lost a nomination was treated as radioactive in the next? What happened to that knowledge?), as well as her low approval ratings almost cost her the nomination, and predictably cost her the Presidency. The people that supported her have to own up and allow the Democratic Party to say what they mean and do what they say for the electorate. Then they'll win. All this complicated chit chat is nonsense, as was the propagandistic boosterism that ignored fact in favor of a coronation. You guys broke it, you guys own it. Stop blaming the 'ignorant white voter' and just give the voter some credit for once.
With two major exceptions--the age of Jackson, and the period after the Great Depression--the political party representing the interests of the economic elite has dominated American politics. It is easy to see how: they know what they want, they have the money to spend manipulating public opinion and they don't really believe in democracy, so they are happy to cheat. Since 1980, Republican trickle down, supply side, tax cuts for the rich, economics sold by Reagan have clearly carried the day (voter suppression helped), and none of that has done anything good for the people who just put Donald Trump into office. It will probably take another depression--damn near got one in 2007--to flip political control back to Democrats. Too bad, but most voters don't vote on issues because they can't understand them.
2
It's rather disingenuous to talk about "imagined liberal disdain" in a piece where the subtext is: what's wrong with these people!? Yes, I agree that Trump's promises were a lie, but at least he respected these people's ability to decide what's best for themselves, rather than regarding the people as irrationally acting against (what elite liberals judge to be) their self-interest.
I agree with JABarry Maryland, who wrote, "This election was not about policy differences. It was about emotions," and he expanded on that.
I'd add that emotions combined with gullibility and propaganda from places such as hate radio and Fox have led people to vote against their own self-interest in elections for many years, and have helped turn most state governments over to the right wingers, also.
It is more discouraging because these voters rarely catch on. Hence the re-elections of anti-worker, give-public-assets-to-the-rich governors like Walker and Christie.
How ironic: the election was rigged...in favor of the bad guy.
I'd add that emotions combined with gullibility and propaganda from places such as hate radio and Fox have led people to vote against their own self-interest in elections for many years, and have helped turn most state governments over to the right wingers, also.
It is more discouraging because these voters rarely catch on. Hence the re-elections of anti-worker, give-public-assets-to-the-rich governors like Walker and Christie.
How ironic: the election was rigged...in favor of the bad guy.
3
No mystery. The economy's long coma is caused by high tax rates and a suffocating library of regulations. Obama care is a great albatross punishing in several different ways. Which candidate acknowledged this?
Wow Mr. Krugman what a powerful and honest appraisal of our political conundrum.
My question is do liberals truly look down on these suffering folks? Of course we should not, but it is hard to shake the feeling that these folks are ignoring their bread and butter issues for the sake of expressing their outrage. The coal bosses who shut down their mines are the ones who control the GOP for which they voted and the policies they will persue under Trum will only create more inequities for which they are outraged.
People hear what they want to hear. Media especially that which seems to water down their idea of the truth does not sell so they go to an outrageous internet which contains every outlandish idea ever thought. When you are down a black hole all you see is blackness. Perhaps it will take a great deal more suffering to help them see what can truly help them.
My question is do liberals truly look down on these suffering folks? Of course we should not, but it is hard to shake the feeling that these folks are ignoring their bread and butter issues for the sake of expressing their outrage. The coal bosses who shut down their mines are the ones who control the GOP for which they voted and the policies they will persue under Trum will only create more inequities for which they are outraged.
People hear what they want to hear. Media especially that which seems to water down their idea of the truth does not sell so they go to an outrageous internet which contains every outlandish idea ever thought. When you are down a black hole all you see is blackness. Perhaps it will take a great deal more suffering to help them see what can truly help them.
1
Paul, let me try to help explain it to you. The displacement resulting from "globalization" and the worship of the false ideology of "free trade" has to be managed. Those displacements, that unemployment, has to be managed, has to be given a thought in advance. Failure to do so results in what your party has given us for the last 50 years. Your party has consigned what's left of the working class to hell on earth. That, by the way, is the party that was clever enough to think that nominating one of the most unpopular people in the country for the office of president was a good idea. (At least half the Republicans were worried about their candidate. Democrats, on the other hand, actually thought they had the right one. It shouldn't surprise anyone at all that people would reject the Democrats.) The surprising thing is that Hitler hasn't been elected a long time ago given how the Republican Party and its fringe wing, the Democrats, have done everything possible to ruin the country.
3
The problem is that the democrats message and real help is demeaning while the Republicans offer pride in history, action and the future (even if it won't work).
Democrats need to send a message which maintains pride and a feeling of agency in the listener.
Democrats need to send a message which maintains pride and a feeling of agency in the listener.
1
Democrats will have a hard time making inroads with the largely but not exclusively southern whites who lack a college degree.
These people (growing up in the south, I knew many of them) are seething with resentment about everything and anything. Just as in the Civil War, the southern white yeoman is being played for a fool by the plantation owner.
They vote their cultural gut and never, ever engage in rational, informed decision-making about candidates.
These people (growing up in the south, I knew many of them) are seething with resentment about everything and anything. Just as in the Civil War, the southern white yeoman is being played for a fool by the plantation owner.
They vote their cultural gut and never, ever engage in rational, informed decision-making about candidates.
2
Knowledge - and the information that knowledge requires to be acted on - comes with high costs: economic ones, to be sure, but also social and psychological. Put another way: it takes a wealth of knowledge to reproduce a wealth of knowledge.
Once political knowledge becomes a commodity like any other, low cost knowledge is the only type of knowledge that low cost consumers can afford and are willing to purchase. Anything else is alien, the product of those that think themselves "better" or "superior," which is to say "more costly but not by definition better."
Doesn't answer the question: How do you get those who have already decided not to buy your product on ideological grounds to even look at what you're selling? How do you get the un-trusting to build trust? But this looks to be the ground that needs the tilling.
Once political knowledge becomes a commodity like any other, low cost knowledge is the only type of knowledge that low cost consumers can afford and are willing to purchase. Anything else is alien, the product of those that think themselves "better" or "superior," which is to say "more costly but not by definition better."
Doesn't answer the question: How do you get those who have already decided not to buy your product on ideological grounds to even look at what you're selling? How do you get the un-trusting to build trust? But this looks to be the ground that needs the tilling.
It seems strange that an economist would not be willing to even consider the importance of pocketbook issues in motivating voters: wage stagnation, job loss, and outrageous health care, housing, and education costs. Apparently, it's easier and more comfortable to blame Comey or to tar the voters as racists and sexists than to take a hard look at actual conditions in much of the country. Both parties have been complicit in the decline of the middle and working classes. The Republicans are far worse, but the Democrats have not been the allies of working people for many years. If the Democratic party and its media surrogates are not willing to reflect on their failures and misjudgments and to revive the New Deal legacy, then perhaps it is time for a labor party in the United States.
3
Krugman what on Earth would it take for you to address honestly some basic economic facts.
I had a hot water problem – my engineer friend did all sorts of calculations to determine that I needed a bigger boiler. However, it turned out I didn’t. He forgot to weigh keeping the temperature at a higher temperature to compensate for a lower volume, thus getting the amount of hot water needed.
Likewise, Dem’s prophesied the end of white America but they forgot to consider raising their temperature.
To wit there are so many things Paul overlooks in his equations.
But the primary one is the comparative reproduction rates of disadvantage minorities over whites.
Currently 50% of all births are paid for with Medicaid. Half of all children under the age of 5 are on some form of social welfare. It may be that 10% of the population owns 90% + of the wealth but there are huge chunks of America that working people won’t live in out of fear for their safety, which have nothing to do with who owns what.
It is those numbers which push up Medical Insurance, education costs and on on.
So Krugman, these dummies are intuitively voting in their best interests, and arriving at with pure common sense.
Maybe you can explain to me – I beg you to reflect on those figures and explain how those numbers aren’t what in fact keep us working 60 hours a week, for pennies on the dollar of what we produce.
I had a hot water problem – my engineer friend did all sorts of calculations to determine that I needed a bigger boiler. However, it turned out I didn’t. He forgot to weigh keeping the temperature at a higher temperature to compensate for a lower volume, thus getting the amount of hot water needed.
Likewise, Dem’s prophesied the end of white America but they forgot to consider raising their temperature.
To wit there are so many things Paul overlooks in his equations.
But the primary one is the comparative reproduction rates of disadvantage minorities over whites.
Currently 50% of all births are paid for with Medicaid. Half of all children under the age of 5 are on some form of social welfare. It may be that 10% of the population owns 90% + of the wealth but there are huge chunks of America that working people won’t live in out of fear for their safety, which have nothing to do with who owns what.
It is those numbers which push up Medical Insurance, education costs and on on.
So Krugman, these dummies are intuitively voting in their best interests, and arriving at with pure common sense.
Maybe you can explain to me – I beg you to reflect on those figures and explain how those numbers aren’t what in fact keep us working 60 hours a week, for pennies on the dollar of what we produce.
3
Dr. Krugman's last sentence is the crux of the course ahead for the Democrat's if they want to become relevant again to the working class, particularly the white portion. Dismay and resentment alone over Trumps broken promises will not in itself turn enough of them. The white portion is still riled about the Black Man in the White House, which to them was a poke in the eye and a glaring example for them as to how they have been discarded. That was the galvanizing point about the Tea Party and it won't go away until they see the enemy for who it is and always has been, the GOP. So how do the Democrats get them to see this? Whomever solves this riddle will be the savior of your democracy. It will need to start in the 2018 elections by at least taking control of the Senate.
3
Mister Paul Krugman or should I call you Mister Paul Crookman like your beloved crooked Hillary, you deliberately don't mention that Hillary and all Clintons are corrupt, you try to find other reasons to explain why she lost. You always think that American people are stupid, well they are not, they smelled the corruption and they did not want corruption at the highest level of this country.
1
It must be realized, Professor Krugman, that TRUMP won because he possessed that indefinable something, "it,"that distinguishes the successful politician from someone like HRC whose feigned sympathy for those hanging on by their thumbs was simply unconvincing. She is not a natural politician, in a race that was emotionally driven. Consider the 1948 race between Dewey and TRUMAN.Dewey lost because he lacked the common touch which Truman possessed, and also because of his mustache, which gave him a gruff, elitist unsympathetic countenance.HST identified with those who were just plain folks. If HRC had bought her "fringues" at Robert Hall rather than at VERA WANG, if she had spent a month in the Hood and challenged Trump to do likewise , if she had exposed his sons's cruelty to animals exemplified in canned hunting expeditions, and asked her audience if they would be proud of their children if they were equally inhumane,if she had hired advisers who did not think they were too smart by half, and who supervised an ineffective ground game, she might have won majority of electoral votes, and been victorious in the election.Cannot underestimate shallowness of her ground game. Right hand did not appear to know what the left hand was doing. Emma Roller pointed this out in an excellent op ed article.
1
Please don't forget your own newspaper, which also devoted far more articles on Clinton emails and Clinton Foundation than any real issue.
So if you want to blame anyone, it was the collective liberal media and political pundits who defeated Hillary. You were looking for a Saint in Hillary but were satisfied with Devil's charm.
So if you want to blame anyone, it was the collective liberal media and political pundits who defeated Hillary. You were looking for a Saint in Hillary but were satisfied with Devil's charm.
4
So the FBI director caused Clinton's loss? Did the FBI director force her to use a private server for classified information?
2
no mystery Doctor.
places like Clay county view women as second class citizens
simple as that.
places like Clay county view women as second class citizens
simple as that.
4
They want a time machine to go backward. Nothing else will suffice. Time to start waiting out the tipping point to a majority minority country.
1
I don't like the outcome.
In regards to Trump voters; what choice did they have? HRC basic message to them was "accept the new reality". Not so easy when you are living in a rural community and the only people making money are heroin and meth dealers.
HRC wasn't offering any leadership, so people decided to go with a scorched earth policy and vote for Trump.
In regards to Trump voters; what choice did they have? HRC basic message to them was "accept the new reality". Not so easy when you are living in a rural community and the only people making money are heroin and meth dealers.
HRC wasn't offering any leadership, so people decided to go with a scorched earth policy and vote for Trump.
6
Really, Krugman. After you spent all that time dumping all over Bernie's campaign and sneering at his supporters, now you wonder why. You had a big part in this yourself, right along with the DNC, and don't ever forget it.
5
You're trying to make this too complex. Electing Trump was like throwing a brick through the glass window to get our attention. It worked.
When a baby cries, you know the baby is unhappy, but it is your job to figure out what is wrong and to fix that thing. The baby can't explain she's got a wet diaper; she just knows she's wet and cold. The working class voters are not stupid, but they're not policy wonks either.
Democrats can do themselves a favor and just admit up-front that they have abandoned the working class for the last generation, and during that time grievous harm has been done to those people. Now figure out how to bring some justice to them.
When a baby cries, you know the baby is unhappy, but it is your job to figure out what is wrong and to fix that thing. The baby can't explain she's got a wet diaper; she just knows she's wet and cold. The working class voters are not stupid, but they're not policy wonks either.
Democrats can do themselves a favor and just admit up-front that they have abandoned the working class for the last generation, and during that time grievous harm has been done to those people. Now figure out how to bring some justice to them.
5
Obama made Tom Perez the Secty of Labor and the Dept of Labor changed many regs in order to increase overtime pay for hourly workers. The Republicans sued to stop these regs from going into effect. Trump and the Republicans will change these regs back so that fewer workers will get overtime pay for the hours they work above 40 per week. How do facts such as these show that Democrats have abandoned the working class for the last generation? The fact is they have not.
4
There will be no backlash-they will just blame the "liberals". Hard to fix stupid.
3
Well you did not mention ILLEGAL immigration at all. All USA poor or working-poor or middle income should be against illegal immigration. It's bad for them economically; it also shocks the conscious how brazenly the Democrats have broken the law to encourage and so be the cause of illegal immigration. But more - some people won't be bribed to vote Democrat and will vote for the USA best interest. That must be frustrating to Democrats since having ruined every place they've governed ONLY have bribing people to vote for them left.
1
why? you need to listen to alt-right extremist communications. they are beyond extreme. beyond kooky. in short, the right wing has and uses many more sources to spread lies and other disinformation--after demonizing clinton for decades.
people believe lies. it's almost a religious experience. ignorance can destroy. what will it take to turn this around? many "speakers" and sources of information that speak the facts.
of course it also will help if a court were to declare the electoral college a violation of the one person, one vote requirements of the 14th amendment.
people believe lies. it's almost a religious experience. ignorance can destroy. what will it take to turn this around? many "speakers" and sources of information that speak the facts.
of course it also will help if a court were to declare the electoral college a violation of the one person, one vote requirements of the 14th amendment.
2
The social issues among devout people topped any sharper economic view of their lives. The ownership of guns, being anti abortion, and simplistic policies such as tariffs or "better trade deals won the day in Clay County. Further Trump made the promise he would bring back coal jobs. It was not so much this was believable, but it touched their sense of dignity that the work they had done in the mines for years was honorable. The talk about clean energy and retooling to a different industry just made foldks feel unappreciated. Maybe this is logic not shared by the liberal world, and worse, no walking in their shoes to to bring across an attractive message.
4
Is it "the economy, stupid" or "the identity, stupid"? In two years - and the mid-terms - perhaps we'll find out.
1
Americans are tired of the political establishment, and the way they do business in Washington. Politicians who care more about what's happening to Children in Aleppo, Syria than what's happening to kids in Flint, Michigan.
Politicians who will spend months discussing the Iran nuclear deal than they will spend time talking about struggle Americans are going through. Why? Because Lobbyists in Washington set the Agenda.
It seems as if Americans need to hire lobbyists to represent them in their own Capital.
Americans wanted Change so much that They elected a Black Man who said he will bring changes just to surround himself with Establishment after he got elected.
During the Primaries Bernie Sanders a Candidate that most voters never heard of almost beat Ms Clinton. Republicans won because they did not rig their elections to favor an establishment candidate like Democrats did.
Politicians who will spend months discussing the Iran nuclear deal than they will spend time talking about struggle Americans are going through. Why? Because Lobbyists in Washington set the Agenda.
It seems as if Americans need to hire lobbyists to represent them in their own Capital.
Americans wanted Change so much that They elected a Black Man who said he will bring changes just to surround himself with Establishment after he got elected.
During the Primaries Bernie Sanders a Candidate that most voters never heard of almost beat Ms Clinton. Republicans won because they did not rig their elections to favor an establishment candidate like Democrats did.
6
What many of these Trump and Republican voters seem to want is REVENGE.
Thanks to AM talk-radio, Fox"News" and outright fake- news; these folks seem to think that American life is literally unbearable because of a series of imaginary "ills" and conspiracies. These "horrors" include things like "political correctness," multi-culturalism, exaggerated beliefs about how many "dangerous immigrants" there really are, myths about "violent" inner-city blacks, the ever-present spectre of Islamic terrorism, and a plethora of absolutely hysterical lies about the "crimes" of liberals and Democrats. This includes the ever popular myth of imaginary efforts to censor or ban the Bible or Christianity! It is hard to sway voters with truth, honesty and solid policy proposals when Republicans get elected by stoking fear and hatred and just making stuff up!!!
Thanks to AM talk-radio, Fox"News" and outright fake- news; these folks seem to think that American life is literally unbearable because of a series of imaginary "ills" and conspiracies. These "horrors" include things like "political correctness," multi-culturalism, exaggerated beliefs about how many "dangerous immigrants" there really are, myths about "violent" inner-city blacks, the ever-present spectre of Islamic terrorism, and a plethora of absolutely hysterical lies about the "crimes" of liberals and Democrats. This includes the ever popular myth of imaginary efforts to censor or ban the Bible or Christianity! It is hard to sway voters with truth, honesty and solid policy proposals when Republicans get elected by stoking fear and hatred and just making stuff up!!!
5
" some combination of white resentment at what voters see as favoritism toward nonwhites (even though it isn’t) and anger on the part of the less educated at liberal elites whom they imagine look down on them."
You picked a nice straw man. You could have just as well have gone into a suburb of a large city and asked what their concerns and fears were. You could also have asked them what their experiences were. Then before you shout "southern strategy!" take a look at your own life along with its demographics and measure it against that of the deplorables. It is true that we have more in common than separates us.
BTW Obamacare does not address all social issues in this country regardless of what Krugman thinks.
You picked a nice straw man. You could have just as well have gone into a suburb of a large city and asked what their concerns and fears were. You could also have asked them what their experiences were. Then before you shout "southern strategy!" take a look at your own life along with its demographics and measure it against that of the deplorables. It is true that we have more in common than separates us.
BTW Obamacare does not address all social issues in this country regardless of what Krugman thinks.
2
Mr. Krugman's question has been answered in the fine book "What's the matter with Kansas?" which asks why people would vote against their own economic interests.
Two reasons are offered: one is that some other value (such as the morality of abortion, say) is held higher than an economic interest. This is easy to do when one has a steady job, of course; the other is that a voter just doesn't believe a particular inconvenient set of facts (such as the fact that many jobs in manufacturing and mining are just not coming back).
To that I would add a particular kink in this election. Having been told by multiple media outlets - including the NYTimes - that HRC was 'being investigated by the FBI' or had 'troubling' questions being asked of her or was hauled up before Congressional committees, many voters assume that she was guilty of SOMETHING.
Not one word on the smoke and smear machine, only an occasional note buried in the back pages about how, oddly, after gallons of ink spilled, there was nothing there.
Two reasons are offered: one is that some other value (such as the morality of abortion, say) is held higher than an economic interest. This is easy to do when one has a steady job, of course; the other is that a voter just doesn't believe a particular inconvenient set of facts (such as the fact that many jobs in manufacturing and mining are just not coming back).
To that I would add a particular kink in this election. Having been told by multiple media outlets - including the NYTimes - that HRC was 'being investigated by the FBI' or had 'troubling' questions being asked of her or was hauled up before Congressional committees, many voters assume that she was guilty of SOMETHING.
Not one word on the smoke and smear machine, only an occasional note buried in the back pages about how, oddly, after gallons of ink spilled, there was nothing there.
1
Over-analysis. 99% of the voters don't read your column and the valid reasons you cited for Hillarys loss. Trump got rid of his primary opponents by running against them and the GOP. Then he got rid of Hillary by running against her and Washington. The people inside the beltway got really tired of hearing "Drain the swamp", but the voters loved the idea.
And, you know what? They were right about that. Trump is about as flawed as a candidate (now President-elect) can be, but that doesn't mean he was wrong that the career politicians in Washington have done miserably over the past couple decades, except for their ability to keep on someone's payroll. It doesn't look like Trump is going to be the one to clean house, but he had the right message.
And, you know what? They were right about that. Trump is about as flawed as a candidate (now President-elect) can be, but that doesn't mean he was wrong that the career politicians in Washington have done miserably over the past couple decades, except for their ability to keep on someone's payroll. It doesn't look like Trump is going to be the one to clean house, but he had the right message.
4
Mr. Krugman and many of his readers seem pretty clueless about Trump supporters. If this may be you, I'd suggest you sit back and listen to this song: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ged-2KpWz-I
It's not new, but it's been something of an anthem in these parts for many years. (The song resonates; the artists aren't particularly popular.) Amie, by Pure Prairie League is another favorite out here....
If you listen, at least briefly, to what people in rural America listen to (compared to what those in urban areas listen to) you may get an idea how the different cultural groups think and feel.
It's not new, but it's been something of an anthem in these parts for many years. (The song resonates; the artists aren't particularly popular.) Amie, by Pure Prairie League is another favorite out here....
If you listen, at least briefly, to what people in rural America listen to (compared to what those in urban areas listen to) you may get an idea how the different cultural groups think and feel.
1
Hillary called half of this population irredeemable and deplorable to her rich donors, and the liberal media cheered her on calling them racist, etc, and you think liberal disdain is imagined? Please.
4
Due to ignorance, naivete and stupidity, people will against their best interests. Sadly, this is nothing new.
3
I voted for Hillary, and worked hard among those I know and didn't know to get her elected. In the primaries, I voted for Bernie and told everyone who would listen that this very angry, anti-Establishment year, it was Hillary who was the very risky candidate, not Bernie.
It's sad and disturbing, but not surprising that Paul Krugman is utterly unable to understand, let alone take responsibility for the catastrophic loss he and the "no we can't" Democratic party delivered to America and the world this election. Shame on you Paul Krugman! You won the Nobel prize for economics, but you don't seem to understand the first thing about what is going on out in this country's economy. Inequality has been growing for decades. Millions are in deep despair. The bottom 80% of the country owned 14% of the countrys wealth in 1990, and now owns about 7%. Median income has gone virtually nowhere by official stats, using 1990 inflation methods real median income has plummeted in the last 25 years.
The Dems abandoned their working class base ages ago, and has told The Big Lie for years about providing incremental economic progress for all. Bernie's New Deal policies were and remain the only way I see to regain the confidence of the huge number of Americans the Dems have lost. You foolishly stood in the way of that during the election, and - even with no understanding of the beating delivered to Dems - you still stand in the way now. Shame on you, Paul Krugman!
It's sad and disturbing, but not surprising that Paul Krugman is utterly unable to understand, let alone take responsibility for the catastrophic loss he and the "no we can't" Democratic party delivered to America and the world this election. Shame on you Paul Krugman! You won the Nobel prize for economics, but you don't seem to understand the first thing about what is going on out in this country's economy. Inequality has been growing for decades. Millions are in deep despair. The bottom 80% of the country owned 14% of the countrys wealth in 1990, and now owns about 7%. Median income has gone virtually nowhere by official stats, using 1990 inflation methods real median income has plummeted in the last 25 years.
The Dems abandoned their working class base ages ago, and has told The Big Lie for years about providing incremental economic progress for all. Bernie's New Deal policies were and remain the only way I see to regain the confidence of the huge number of Americans the Dems have lost. You foolishly stood in the way of that during the election, and - even with no understanding of the beating delivered to Dems - you still stand in the way now. Shame on you, Paul Krugman!
8
It's simply a matter of 3 Eees - Emotions, Energy and Excitement. YOu can't generate any of these with wonkish mastery of plans and policies. Or by surrounding yourself with elitists, or depending solely on Wall Street bankers and high rollers for funding. Going down and dirty also has its place in contests where winning is everything.
On the Comey matter, I'm totally with Paul Krugman. Comey's sanctimonious intervention in the eleventh hour of the campaign probably cost Mrs Clinton a percentage or two at every polling station throughout the country. Monkeying with voting machines or manipulation thereof through hacking is also not beyond the realm of suspicion for me.
On the Comey matter, I'm totally with Paul Krugman. Comey's sanctimonious intervention in the eleventh hour of the campaign probably cost Mrs Clinton a percentage or two at every polling station throughout the country. Monkeying with voting machines or manipulation thereof through hacking is also not beyond the realm of suspicion for me.
1
Dear Dr Krugman: is it possible that you personally are unable to understand how unhappy most of us are because you personally are, by any objective statistical standard, part of the elite ?
That you are unable to understand, emotionally that even an empty promise of jobs and dignity is better then nothing ?
You do understand as an economist, that the utility of dignity can be greater then the utility of money ?
as Obamacare...
If the entire democratic party had the PR sense of Lee Atwater's pinky finger, Obama would have held a press conf in the rose garden every month
And he would have had some person whose life was changed by ocare
and this would be co-ordinated with state level events, each dem senator or senior rep holding a press conf, designed for that 30 second TV shot, with some person whose life was better for obama care - say a hardworking white guy who got injured
The democratic party would have sent a snail mail ever quarter to every person on medicare or medicaid or social security. The post card would say, you got benefits this quarter from the FEDERAL GOVT and this how the GOP wants to take them away.
Every month, the EPA would hold a press conference beside some polluted lake or stream, this is where kids get sick, and this is why we need regulations
Have you Paul Krugman, noticed how your copays and deductibles are going thru the roof ? you do know what salience is, the cost paid by your employer vs the cost out of your own pocket
That you are unable to understand, emotionally that even an empty promise of jobs and dignity is better then nothing ?
You do understand as an economist, that the utility of dignity can be greater then the utility of money ?
as Obamacare...
If the entire democratic party had the PR sense of Lee Atwater's pinky finger, Obama would have held a press conf in the rose garden every month
And he would have had some person whose life was changed by ocare
and this would be co-ordinated with state level events, each dem senator or senior rep holding a press conf, designed for that 30 second TV shot, with some person whose life was better for obama care - say a hardworking white guy who got injured
The democratic party would have sent a snail mail ever quarter to every person on medicare or medicaid or social security. The post card would say, you got benefits this quarter from the FEDERAL GOVT and this how the GOP wants to take them away.
Every month, the EPA would hold a press conference beside some polluted lake or stream, this is where kids get sick, and this is why we need regulations
Have you Paul Krugman, noticed how your copays and deductibles are going thru the roof ? you do know what salience is, the cost paid by your employer vs the cost out of your own pocket
4
For those wanting to understand the gap between voting in one's own economic interest and voting based on emotions or traditional party ties, I'd recommend Arlie Russell Hochschild's recent book "Strangers in Their Own Land". A major premise of the book is that many Americans view economic prosperity as a long line of people struggling to get to the top of the hill. They don't envy the people who got there fairly but feel violated by those who "cut in line" in front of them. Minorities benefiting by affirmative action. Immigrants in the country illegally. Jobs outsourced to other countries. Government workers who do nothing to earn their plush jobs. And that essentially every government program aside from the military is seen as unneeded or unwanted. Stated also are the common myths. 40% of people employed are government workers (real answer: more like 15% including military, national guard, state, local, etc). Economy always does better under Republican presidents. (Real answer: Dems have done much better though controversy exists as to why.)
I think all of this can be exploited easily with the politics of resentment we have just seen. And coupled with all the one issue voters, ("I'll vote for anyone who lowers my taxes" "I can't see ever supporting anyone who approves of abortion" "If Dems win, my gun collection is endangered"), easy to see that people are not voting in their best economic interests if any degree of analysis was really applied to things.
I think all of this can be exploited easily with the politics of resentment we have just seen. And coupled with all the one issue voters, ("I'll vote for anyone who lowers my taxes" "I can't see ever supporting anyone who approves of abortion" "If Dems win, my gun collection is endangered"), easy to see that people are not voting in their best economic interests if any degree of analysis was really applied to things.
1
Your using of the extremely Republican state of Kentucky is suspect. When was the last time a Democrat won there?
Right now the concern is Pennsylvania, Michigan, Ohio, Iowa, Wisconsin. All states that Hillary Clinton lost, and all were states where she should have rightly won. All places where Democrats have a history of winning because a large portion of those White Working Class voters you are disparaging have voted consistently democrat for the last 40 years.
I would argue that when Barak Obama said the words "Change" as a campaign slogan, that resonated with the Democrats in those states. I suspect that the change that most midwestern democrats were hoping for was that Democrats in Washington DC stop ignoring them (except during election season when they need their vote.)
Of course, Obama failed to bring change. Like you said, a vote for President Obama was a vote against their economic self-interest. Hillary Clinton offered more of the same. While Donald Trump offered the promised change.
The Donald might have been a Hail Mary pass, but when schools, water supply, police, fire, roads in your community are failing and your job has been outsourced, and your kid is doing meth, and the liberal is elite scolding you for your privilege. A vote for a demagogue kinda makes sense.
This is a much better argument, than yours.
https://www.theguardian.com/commentisfree/2016/nov/20/clinton-gone-silve...
Right now the concern is Pennsylvania, Michigan, Ohio, Iowa, Wisconsin. All states that Hillary Clinton lost, and all were states where she should have rightly won. All places where Democrats have a history of winning because a large portion of those White Working Class voters you are disparaging have voted consistently democrat for the last 40 years.
I would argue that when Barak Obama said the words "Change" as a campaign slogan, that resonated with the Democrats in those states. I suspect that the change that most midwestern democrats were hoping for was that Democrats in Washington DC stop ignoring them (except during election season when they need their vote.)
Of course, Obama failed to bring change. Like you said, a vote for President Obama was a vote against their economic self-interest. Hillary Clinton offered more of the same. While Donald Trump offered the promised change.
The Donald might have been a Hail Mary pass, but when schools, water supply, police, fire, roads in your community are failing and your job has been outsourced, and your kid is doing meth, and the liberal is elite scolding you for your privilege. A vote for a demagogue kinda makes sense.
This is a much better argument, than yours.
https://www.theguardian.com/commentisfree/2016/nov/20/clinton-gone-silve...
2
They are crying over milk that they spilled by voting for a feckless and craven Congress over and over again. They have struck another bad bargain that only going to make their lives and ours much worse.
1
You don't get it Krugman. You will never get it because you are a rigid ideologue. We simply don't think rigid "progressive" ideologues are smart enough to centrally control the US economy. We believe economic and political power is best distributed to the people not concentrated in DC. We believe that voting for that decentralization is in our best interests.
3
19,000, Krugman. 19,000.
A Ph.D. from M.I.T.
19,000. Way to call them, Krugman.
Now, what were you saying about whites without college degrees?
A Ph.D. from M.I.T.
19,000. Way to call them, Krugman.
Now, what were you saying about whites without college degrees?
1
"Recently Bernie Sanders offered an answer: Democrats should “go beyond identity politics.” What’s needed, he said, are candidates who understand that working-class incomes are down, who will “stand up to Wall Street, to the insurance companies, to the drug companies, to the fossil fuel industry.”
Krugman: "But is there any reason to believe that this would work? Let me offer some reasons for doubt."
Well, this is exactly why the Democrats lost. People like Krugman, the self-named Conscience of a Liberal, ridiculed and dismissed someone who actually was the only true Democrat running. Instead they backed someone who had republican stripes, who would rather pander for GOP votes than respect those who have more democratic leanings.
Whatever happened to Democrats being the champions of the working class? They were for more the first half of my 61 years.
Bill Clinton happened, and pushed through GOP policies like NAFTA, dismantling Glass-Stegall, the Telecommunications Act of 1996, gutting Welfare, etc. And Hillary was more of the same, plus a warhawk. And deceptive. Or believable.
What political family has profiteered more than the Clintons?
Krugman needs to get out of his professorial office in his ivory tower and see what is really happening to Americans not in the upper 1%. We're all struggling Krugman. Everything is becoming unaffordable. The people have no say, just the wealthy and corporations.
If you can't recognize this, then retire.
Krugman: "But is there any reason to believe that this would work? Let me offer some reasons for doubt."
Well, this is exactly why the Democrats lost. People like Krugman, the self-named Conscience of a Liberal, ridiculed and dismissed someone who actually was the only true Democrat running. Instead they backed someone who had republican stripes, who would rather pander for GOP votes than respect those who have more democratic leanings.
Whatever happened to Democrats being the champions of the working class? They were for more the first half of my 61 years.
Bill Clinton happened, and pushed through GOP policies like NAFTA, dismantling Glass-Stegall, the Telecommunications Act of 1996, gutting Welfare, etc. And Hillary was more of the same, plus a warhawk. And deceptive. Or believable.
What political family has profiteered more than the Clintons?
Krugman needs to get out of his professorial office in his ivory tower and see what is really happening to Americans not in the upper 1%. We're all struggling Krugman. Everything is becoming unaffordable. The people have no say, just the wealthy and corporations.
If you can't recognize this, then retire.
12
Comey's actions certainly had an effect, it was an action that defied all prior standards of noninterference in elections by the FBI. In hind sight, the DOJ should have required Comey to conduct the review BEFORE he sent out his communication to Congress and the voting public. The investigation found nothing, but the it did cause a marked change in the polls, no sane person can deny the affect this historic interference.
In regards to the strength of Trump's support among northern white working class voters, the Clinton campaign made some strategic mistakes especially given the fact that Obama and Sanders had gotten a more significant portion of support by this same group recently. Unfortunately a lack of a compelling, competing economic message by the Clinton campaign to this voting group allowed Trump to fill the void. It is never a good strategy to take any group for granted or to right off a significant portion of the electorate. As we know from the history of Germany in the 1930's a campaign based on hate and prejudice is difficult to overcome, but Obama proved in 2008 and 2012 a compelling campaign with a clear broad based message can appeal to a broad and diverse coalition of the electorate.
In regards to the strength of Trump's support among northern white working class voters, the Clinton campaign made some strategic mistakes especially given the fact that Obama and Sanders had gotten a more significant portion of support by this same group recently. Unfortunately a lack of a compelling, competing economic message by the Clinton campaign to this voting group allowed Trump to fill the void. It is never a good strategy to take any group for granted or to right off a significant portion of the electorate. As we know from the history of Germany in the 1930's a campaign based on hate and prejudice is difficult to overcome, but Obama proved in 2008 and 2012 a compelling campaign with a clear broad based message can appeal to a broad and diverse coalition of the electorate.
" If so, there may be a backlash when the coal and manufacturing jobs don’t come back, while health insurance disappears."
What does it matter, Doc? You didn't really address how the Great Gerrymander of 2010 and it's effect on chances for Dems to make big gains in elections. The country is so gerrymandered that Dems would have to make HUGE gains in elections just to flip one or more houses of Congress. We have already seen this effect in elections since 2010. There could indeed be a backlash, but none probably large enough to switch party dominance in congress. Republicans know this, and they will be content to shove whatever agenda they have down our throats with impunity as they know control of congress couldn't change, even in a wave election favoring Democrats. The private sector takeover of the government is complete.
What does it matter, Doc? You didn't really address how the Great Gerrymander of 2010 and it's effect on chances for Dems to make big gains in elections. The country is so gerrymandered that Dems would have to make HUGE gains in elections just to flip one or more houses of Congress. We have already seen this effect in elections since 2010. There could indeed be a backlash, but none probably large enough to switch party dominance in congress. Republicans know this, and they will be content to shove whatever agenda they have down our throats with impunity as they know control of congress couldn't change, even in a wave election favoring Democrats. The private sector takeover of the government is complete.
3
"Whites without college degrees". Hmmm. Does anyone ever segment the Black or Hispanic vote into those with and without college degrees? Well no. It's OK to subtly break the White vote into "smart" people vs "dumb" people, but it's apparently not necessary/possible/agenda bolstering to do it with Blacks and Hispanics?
16
I am not disagreeing but the point is?
1
Why is is done? Is it a subtle form of racism? Is it a reflection of the tendency for Blacks and Hispanics to vote as a bloc, so no need to segment them by education? If so, what does that say, that they are all voting as "smart" college educated folks or as "dumb" folks without college degrees?
The fact remains, the various groups are treated very differently. The media isn't highlighting how Whites "without a college degree" voted because they thought they voted correctly.
The fact remains, the various groups are treated very differently. The media isn't highlighting how Whites "without a college degree" voted because they thought they voted correctly.
2
It should not have been a close election. The Democrats, in collusion with the mainstream media, including the NY Times, defeated Sanders, who engendered Trump-like enthusiasm, and ran the Jeb! of their party. The same media, including this jewel of a paper, gave free non-judgmental 24/7 coverage to Trump, gleefully reaping the benefits. It is only now realizing that we've succumbed to a fascist takeover of our country.
6
PK, you know a lot about economics, but you really need to spend time with people in these areas where there is a sense that things are just "running down" and nobody cares.
1
It has NOTHING to do with jobs..It is a pure backlash to the reality of whites becoming minority players in the near future....It is the horrible spectacle of a country that has yet to face up to how 9/11 changed us and NOT for the better..We are a simpering, whining little country who is now afraid of every damn thing..Terrorists, immigrants, Ebola, Zika, Black Lives Matter, Wall Street, Police, PTSD.....It's a very long list put together by an entire generation that embraces fear over respect every time they are presented with a serious problem....Sorry--our wonderful military is still the "Land of the Brave"....The rest of America today is the Land of the Wimp who finger points at everyone instead of marching over to a mirror and taking a long ,hard look. I think that reflection might be the scariest thing we have yet to see. It saddens me to realize how we have devolved into a country that now whines all the time.
3
"Stupid is as stupid does" Gump.
2
In a battle between two liars the better liar wins.
3
Hey Vermont, the Bernie Problem was he spent Trillions he never had.
Bernie is a real wild-eyed Utopian Socialist who never pays the bills.
In that reckless financial plan, he is exactly like The Trump.
And whom is the other liar?
Prey tell Vermont, whom?
That faux liberal land of all-white socialist tree choppers.
Bernie is a real wild-eyed Utopian Socialist who never pays the bills.
In that reckless financial plan, he is exactly like The Trump.
And whom is the other liar?
Prey tell Vermont, whom?
That faux liberal land of all-white socialist tree choppers.
Paul, You forgot the role religion plays in rural Appalachia.
2
White working class resentment is real and this the core: integrating schools via forced busing during the late 1960s & '70s; plus the student deferments middle class & upper class males used during their college years to avoid getting drafted and being sent to Viet Nam.
Time will show the white working class that Trump is a liar ... textile plants in Asia are NOT coming back to the Carolinas; auto plants in Mexico and Asia are NOT going to be shut down and moved back to the midwest.
The tragic part of this: the white working class won't care. They've made a lifetime commitment to resentment & hate. The line of Republican Gingrich and Trump imitators will be long ....
Time will show the white working class that Trump is a liar ... textile plants in Asia are NOT coming back to the Carolinas; auto plants in Mexico and Asia are NOT going to be shut down and moved back to the midwest.
The tragic part of this: the white working class won't care. They've made a lifetime commitment to resentment & hate. The line of Republican Gingrich and Trump imitators will be long ....
4
I agree completely with your thesis, but KY has gone solidly Republican for President for 20 years. Question is what changed in OH, MI, WI.
5
Paul, I'll solve this mystery for you. It's all about where these people are getting their information. It's Fox News, and/or other right-wing media Fox has spawned and enabled. These media outlets couch every issue in terms of patriotism, and these less educated citizens fall for it hook, line, and sinker.
4
You are absolutely correct. Here in Southern Indiana if you receive basic cable, the only news channels offered are Fox News. Even people with college degrees from here take Fox News and Rush Limbaugh as gospel. I don't think I ever saw a Clinton yard sign in the area. I know I did not have one out of fear of retaliation. So much for freedom.
3
I voted for Ms. Clinton, and I don't have any sympathy for Mr. Trump or his courtiers. But I don't think the people Mr. Krugman is talking about "imagine" that elites look down on them - Mr. Krugman appears to be engaging in that very conduct in this very column.
6
Failure has many fathers and rather than going into them here, I will say that one of those reasons is the brainwashing machine of Fox News and right-wing talk radio.
One cannot overstate how important this is. The constant misinformation and stoked resentment one gets from these outlets is literally propaganda and brainwashing. I don't know how we're going to deal with this. We've excoriated Communist countries for having Pravda, etc. Well, we've got our own Prav-duh right here in the US of A.
One cannot overstate how important this is. The constant misinformation and stoked resentment one gets from these outlets is literally propaganda and brainwashing. I don't know how we're going to deal with this. We've excoriated Communist countries for having Pravda, etc. Well, we've got our own Prav-duh right here in the US of A.
3
Krugman, as much as anyone, is to blame for Trump's election. His myopic, ivory-tower misreading of the national mood led him to shill for Hillary and undermine Bernie during the primaries. He just can't see beyond his own establishment privilege. Paul should move to coal country and live there for as long as Trump is president. Maybe there he'll glean insight into some of the perplexing paradoxes he wrings his hands over in this column.
6
Voters are not rational.
The Times made the mistake of the smug. They've known Trump for a striver and fraud for years. They assumed this was plain. They were very wrong.
When Trump flirted openly with Putin and obviously used Russian help to troll comments and elections he should have been publicly excoriated by the press. He should have been arrested. Trump is crooked, and a traitor, and should be jailed. He is a textbook psychopath and projects everything he's guilty of upon everyone else. Wake up America! You've elected a Nazi or Authoritarian Plutocrat Emperor King at best.
The Times made the mistake of the smug. They've known Trump for a striver and fraud for years. They assumed this was plain. They were very wrong.
When Trump flirted openly with Putin and obviously used Russian help to troll comments and elections he should have been publicly excoriated by the press. He should have been arrested. Trump is crooked, and a traitor, and should be jailed. He is a textbook psychopath and projects everything he's guilty of upon everyone else. Wake up America! You've elected a Nazi or Authoritarian Plutocrat Emperor King at best.
2
Paul,
I appreciate your recent and thoughtful analysis of how the people of coal country have benefited from democratic policies and your the underlying reasons why their jobs have disappeared. While all of this information was available to voters before the election, I don't imagine many folks living in these communities regularly read the New York Times.
I appreciate your recent and thoughtful analysis of how the people of coal country have benefited from democratic policies and your the underlying reasons why their jobs have disappeared. While all of this information was available to voters before the election, I don't imagine many folks living in these communities regularly read the New York Times.
2
As is so often the case in pieces like this, no mention of affirmative action. Even paranoids have real enemies, and affirmative action, a very-visible bedrock belief of the Democrats, is a real enemy of whites without (and with) college degrees. Your failure to bring this up makes you, Mr. Krugman, part of the news media that 'refuse to cover policy substance'.
It's an old book but I recommend it anyway, especially the chapter "Working Class Authoritarianism." "Political Man" by Seymour Martin Lipsett. In trying to understand what was going on in this election I kept thinking of something that I read many years ago. Written in 1959 I think it is still spot-on.
5
The hubris required to dismiss poor and working class white voters as ignorant bumpkins who vote against their own supposed interests is breathtaking. Has it ever occurred to you that perhaps these people would rather have a job than an EBT card? That they have some vestige of a pride that precludes their wanting Big Daddy government to provide for them? That they perceive a difference between a dollar earned and a handout? Are you so detached from the humanity of your fellow citizens that you see them only as consumers of government programs and not as real people with thoughts and emotions of their own?
4
If you frame America as an atomized string of identities as the Democrats do, you should not be surprised if you get white identity politics as a result. White working class people who suffer oppression get tired of hearing about how everyone is more oppressed than they are.
The only way out is to frame political issues in terms of class. The real divisions in the U.S. are between those who have the money and power and those who do not. How come you never hear the words "working class" come out of the mouths of Obama or Hillary, why is everything they do for "middle class families"? Why isn't a war on poverty on the Democrat agenda?
Stop dissing Bernie and learn your lessons...
The only way out is to frame political issues in terms of class. The real divisions in the U.S. are between those who have the money and power and those who do not. How come you never hear the words "working class" come out of the mouths of Obama or Hillary, why is everything they do for "middle class families"? Why isn't a war on poverty on the Democrat agenda?
Stop dissing Bernie and learn your lessons...
4
We are doing the best we can and you are all just racist. Please, Obama presided over 8 years of slow motion austerity and the nation is still below potential. You used to know this and wrote wrote about it at length in your blog. but that was before your infatuation with Clinton clouded your judgement and lifted all center right Democrats above criticism.
Sure Democratic policies are less damaging to the working class than Republicans but they are still damaging to the working class of all races. Whites vote Trump while blacks and browns stay home and please drop the gratuitous digs at Sanders.
Sure Democratic policies are less damaging to the working class than Republicans but they are still damaging to the working class of all races. Whites vote Trump while blacks and browns stay home and please drop the gratuitous digs at Sanders.
2
The reason they won't vote for the party of the working class is simple: Fox News denigrate Democrats all the time, and that's all they watch.
6
Elections ARE about the candidates. We do not, as a nation, elect on the basis of policies, which - whether promoted by the left or the right - are guesses as to what will work better. No one can prove that one school of thought is better than another: that goes for evolution, climate change, economic theory...after all, Mike Pence made no secret of the fact that he is a Christian first, a Conservative second, and a Republican third. Being an American citizen, or a father, or husband...somewhere down there.
The election of 2016 pitted an experienced salesman against an experienced political thinker. Experienced salespeople knows that there is no law against lying if you're not under oath in a court, and also knows that once he has the customer's trust he can get that person to believe that spending a lot more money to buy a Cadillac than a Chevy makes sense. Or that paying more for exactly the same house in a better location / location / location is sensible.
Trump - who dodged service in Vietnam with student deferments and letters asserting that he had bone spurs in his feet from some physician that he might have paid big-league money to, I don't know but people are saying - that man was solidly backed by current and former combat veterans. He promises that he'll "bomb the s*** out of ISIS" with the unspoken assertion that if he does that, it will end ISIS.
Clinton was honest. Neither cars nor real estate nor programs sell themselves.
The election of 2016 pitted an experienced salesman against an experienced political thinker. Experienced salespeople knows that there is no law against lying if you're not under oath in a court, and also knows that once he has the customer's trust he can get that person to believe that spending a lot more money to buy a Cadillac than a Chevy makes sense. Or that paying more for exactly the same house in a better location / location / location is sensible.
Trump - who dodged service in Vietnam with student deferments and letters asserting that he had bone spurs in his feet from some physician that he might have paid big-league money to, I don't know but people are saying - that man was solidly backed by current and former combat veterans. He promises that he'll "bomb the s*** out of ISIS" with the unspoken assertion that if he does that, it will end ISIS.
Clinton was honest. Neither cars nor real estate nor programs sell themselves.
2
Krugman: "Remember, over the course of the 2016 campaign, the three network news shows devoted a total of 35 minutes combined to policy issues...they devoted 125 minutes to Mrs. Clinton’s emails."
This is one major reason we have a president-elect Trump and not a president-elect Clinton. TV news contributed to the ignorance of the American voter. We can expect the same from TV news when it comes to Paul Ryan's "Better Way," which is nothing less than the "Big Con."
This is one major reason we have a president-elect Trump and not a president-elect Clinton. TV news contributed to the ignorance of the American voter. We can expect the same from TV news when it comes to Paul Ryan's "Better Way," which is nothing less than the "Big Con."
4
Resentment at liberal elites- this is precisely the strategy of Mrs May in the UK. We have efficient healthcare, because it is organised and run as a public service. The government is starving it of funds, starving it of the EU migrant workers it needs to operate, and privatising it to for-profit companies. The government is acting against the interests of the people, on some market-fundamentalist crusade to slash public services, and make any remaining public services privately owned. I watched the British National Party in Oldham, where I lived, use resentment and fear of migrants to win votes, leading to its greatest success in a Parliamentary election, where its leader won over six thousand votes in my constituency. Fifteen years later, the formerly mainstream centre-right Conservative Party, still in government, is using the same tactics, attacking EU Remainers as "the liberal metropolitan elite", treating Brexit as a matter of Pride in Nationhood- we are better than them, and we will overcome. Where people don't believe Left solutions will work, they will vote for the emotional highs that the Right offers- Pride now, but soon Hatred.
The Autumn Statement and the Office of Budget Responsibility show the parlous state of our economy, but the Express, Mr Farage's propaganda sheet, screams BRITAIN MATCH-FIT FOR EU EXIT!
The Autumn Statement and the Office of Budget Responsibility show the parlous state of our economy, but the Express, Mr Farage's propaganda sheet, screams BRITAIN MATCH-FIT FOR EU EXIT!
1
College education for everyone who wants it, problem solved.
2
..."and she would probably be president-elect if the director of the F.B.I. hadn’t laid such a heavy thumb on the scales, just days before the election."
Oh my god, give it a rest. We all know that wasn't why she lost. Her own campaign staff said that the emails were already "baked" into people's opinions and that the Comey letter, therefore, wasn't going to change opinions.
Oh my god, give it a rest. We all know that wasn't why she lost. Her own campaign staff said that the emails were already "baked" into people's opinions and that the Comey letter, therefore, wasn't going to change opinions.
2
Great article! I guess that the to capture the white working class vote (in 2016 at least) the candidate had to be a vain mendacious blowhard. Not something Clinton could turn herself into.
2
PK is right again. In 1964 the Democratic party came out for Civil Rights. The solidly Democrat South flipped into Republicans. Churches opened their own private schools so they would not be forced to integrate their children in public schools and began promoting charter schools and vouchers. This isn't wild conspiracy, it's common verifiable knowledge. Democrats are not going to win white working class voters with economic solutions. White working class voters have a very real problem with hatred and racism and it is a much harder problem to solve than the economy. The only hope for Democrats is voter turnout which is not so good so far.
4
Lets be clear, a lot of the struggling whites who voted for Trump find it easier to feel angry, aggrieved and anti-establishment than to think rationally and strategically. I don't know whether they can't do the latter or simply prefer the emotional satisfaction of doing the former. In either case, it's deeply discouraging. Trump was transparently a narcissistic con artist to anyone capable and willing to inform themselves; millions willfully failed to do so in their delight at his populist demagoguery, his ludicrous promises, his absurd xenophobia. I will have zero sympathy for these fools when their latter-day Hughie Long shafts them with his tax cuts for billionaires and his self-serving crony capitalism.
4
Don't waste your time trying to analyze this problem. As a lifetime resident of a red state, I can tell you that this particular syndrome was decades in the making and it will be decades before it is excised from our national identity. Idaho used to be a purple State, remember Frank Church? Up until the mid-1970s we actually had Democrats serving in Congress, ss senators, and governors. With the advent of Reagan, and what I would call the unholy alliance of the Republican party with the religious right, and what I would also call identity politics, that is an all out pitch for white working class America, we have been pulled down into the Republicans swamp. When Reagan was elected, respectable economist decried his policy of tax cuts, and that it would eventually cause harm to the economy. Did it matter? No, because so many people who may have voted Democrat in the past, believed that Republicanism and religious righteousness were synonymous. In short that is the problem. At least in my part of the country, Republicanism has been anointed by God himself / herself /itself and everyone else belongs to the group of pagans and libertines who want to destroy the country and take away their guns. They live in a black-and-white world, and nuance cannot penetrate it, and critical thinking will never breach its walls.
3
70% of Americans believe in Global Warming. This may turn out to be the defining issue of our generation. Yet not a single question on Climate Change was asked in any of the presidential debates. HIlary Clinton did say that coal jobs wern't coming back but the fact that she added that she wanted to work for new, better jobs was not the lead in any coverage.
The press, even our supposedly liberal press dwelt on personality and were sidetracked by the asides woefully neglecting issues that impact the lives of the people who voted for Trump.
So, as Mr. Kruman asked, "What happened here?" The Democrats didn't do the job of holding the press to task, to cover real issues and not get lost in a land reality-show entertainment. Solving that problem is task one, not just for the next election, but every day as we oppose Trump. Face it, he is our President and we have to deal with him every day.
The press, even our supposedly liberal press dwelt on personality and were sidetracked by the asides woefully neglecting issues that impact the lives of the people who voted for Trump.
So, as Mr. Kruman asked, "What happened here?" The Democrats didn't do the job of holding the press to task, to cover real issues and not get lost in a land reality-show entertainment. Solving that problem is task one, not just for the next election, but every day as we oppose Trump. Face it, he is our President and we have to deal with him every day.
A democracy requires an educated electorate. Our new media environment, with its emphasis on sensationalism, gossip, and "reality entertainment", have made clear the need for discernment when we read/watch the daily news. Remember when The National Enquirer was a joke rag to read in the checkout line? Now we have Fox News and Breitbart to question. But who questions without an adequate education; at least a rigorous education through high school?
2
No, Margaret, a democracy requires people willing and able to see their interests and vote for them.
A very great part of the Great American Con is that everybody is supposed to vote for Big Ideas, the currently biggest being makng America great, "again" for some reason.
Modern media have nothing to do with this Con. It's been the American Way at least back to the identification of social democracy with Germans in WWI: for working people to vote working class interests was furrin and treezun.
Here's your factoid du jour to ponder: Abraham Lincoln spoke German, and read the German language press of his constituents, many of them refugees on the losing side of the democratic revolutions of 1848. Just a passing note...
-dlj.
A very great part of the Great American Con is that everybody is supposed to vote for Big Ideas, the currently biggest being makng America great, "again" for some reason.
Modern media have nothing to do with this Con. It's been the American Way at least back to the identification of social democracy with Germans in WWI: for working people to vote working class interests was furrin and treezun.
Here's your factoid du jour to ponder: Abraham Lincoln spoke German, and read the German language press of his constituents, many of them refugees on the losing side of the democratic revolutions of 1848. Just a passing note...
-dlj.
GOP followers have been voting against their economic self-interest for years, maybe decades. I don't know what identity politics is supposed to mean, but what the GOP has done is find wedge issues, often based on social and religious beliefs, and used those to influence voters. And while pandering is part of it, they truly have been trying to deliver by attacking women (through their needs for contraceptives or abortions, as well as equal pay), gays and transsexuals (through restrictions on marriage, adoptions, visitation rights in hospitals and most recently toilets), minorities (through voting rights and various social programs), and so on. Trump is just the latest and most blatant spokesman for these attacks. And he was anathema to the mainstream GOP only because he was blatant and they were afraid that he would drag them to electoral defeat by saying out loud what they disguise. They have been quite willing to return to him in victory and are no longer particularly concerned about the positions he has taken.
I don't think that the continuing failure of the GOP, and now Trump, to deliver on the economic promises will make much difference in the next election or the ones to follow. The social and religious issues will still be there and, if anything, the continuation of negative economic trends for the white working class will only fuel their many resentments.
This is not about thinking and analysis. This is about frustration, anger and fear and lashing out at others.
I don't think that the continuing failure of the GOP, and now Trump, to deliver on the economic promises will make much difference in the next election or the ones to follow. The social and religious issues will still be there and, if anything, the continuation of negative economic trends for the white working class will only fuel their many resentments.
This is not about thinking and analysis. This is about frustration, anger and fear and lashing out at others.
2
Krugman: "To be honest, I don’t fully understand this resentment." I believe you.
It's rational for voters to ask, which candidate hates me more? I think the answer was pretty clear for many whites when Hillary called half of Trump supporters deplorables who were racist, sexist, homophobic, xenophobic, Islamophobic, and ignorant. The media elites followed that up by saying that the percentage was actually higher than half. Even those not supporting Trump felt insulted and outside the tent of the PC- and identity-obsessed Dems. Most Trump supporters I know voted for him despite his faults, not because of them. They wanted change because they dislike both parties. This is not so hard to understand, is it?
It's rational for voters to ask, which candidate hates me more? I think the answer was pretty clear for many whites when Hillary called half of Trump supporters deplorables who were racist, sexist, homophobic, xenophobic, Islamophobic, and ignorant. The media elites followed that up by saying that the percentage was actually higher than half. Even those not supporting Trump felt insulted and outside the tent of the PC- and identity-obsessed Dems. Most Trump supporters I know voted for him despite his faults, not because of them. They wanted change because they dislike both parties. This is not so hard to understand, is it?
1
Dear Prof. K, the election is over. Hillary lost and all she had to say to the coal miners was "coal is not coming back." Donald Trump said he'd reopen the mines and was cheered and won their votes. So, messages count and only Bernie had a message that would have neutralized the Trump fantasy promise. It's time to "man up" and accept your role in bashing Bernie while hyping Hillary that has produced this election debacle. Hillary's entire campaign strategy of pivoting to the non-progressive, Republican center
and focusing almost entirely on Trump's character while forgetting her own husband's famous mantra, "It's the economy stupid!"
and focusing almost entirely on Trump's character while forgetting her own husband's famous mantra, "It's the economy stupid!"
5
It beats the heck out of me too. I'd say stupidity is a big cause, and not necessarily congenital stupidity. Religion that is an affront to reason and gives people practice believing nonsense is probably a factor; privates-grabbing Trump got the evangelical vote. Then there's a tendency to believe what you want to believe and see what you want to see, instead of paying attention to the facts. And diet could be a source of stupidity. If one doesn't consume iodized salt and get enough iodine to keep one's thyroid churning out thyroxine, fetuses and babies have brain development problems and adults get fat, sluggish and mentally dull. And there are substantial sales of plain salt in the US. A local store I see a lot of seems to be selling half iodized salt and half plain salt. Many food makers don't use iodized salt in their products. So I would suggest that a significant portion of the public may be trying to think with the handicap of an iodine deficiency. Whatever the reasons, stupidity has been prevailing in too many recent elections.
1
The causes of this are simple, Mr. Krugman: lack of education and news sources that are inadequate, at best. Visiting family in Wisconsin and Ohio before the election, I saw this first hand. The loudest voices are Rush and his ilk on the radio, and the papers of record, e.g., Milwaukee Journal and Toledo Blade, follow suit. The inability to discern fact from fiction, which education would provide, has made these sources of information the most powerful determinant in the elections. If it's true that Karl Rove is the architect of this, then he is a genius, albeit an evil one.
5
One thing which the Democrats need to do is to get their supporters to turnout at every election. I have seen reports that if minority and women voters had gone to the polls for Mrs. Clinton as they did for President Obama, she would have won in enough of the swing states to carry the electoral college. Some people said that she did not exhibit sufficient empathy, that she did not excite them, etc. It is also distressing that many democrats bought into the republican smears. Mrs. Clinton has been under almost continuous investigation for years and what have they found?
Mrs. Clinton's loss puts Trump in a position to appoint federal judges (Supreme Court, Appeals Courts, and district judges) and to appoint the Attorney General. Jeff Sessions is a nasty little man who is industrious and clever. I expect that he will do everything he can to make life hard for immigrants, family planning (particularly Planned Parenthood), civil rights groups. In short he will be tough on the weak and solicitous for the rich and powerful (particularly white).
In 2008, everyone turned out to elect President Obama, then in 2010 they stayed at home. The republicans took the Congress and obstructed everything they could. Many voters said that "Obama couldn't accomplish anything so we need to vote republican."
Mrs. Clinton's loss puts Trump in a position to appoint federal judges (Supreme Court, Appeals Courts, and district judges) and to appoint the Attorney General. Jeff Sessions is a nasty little man who is industrious and clever. I expect that he will do everything he can to make life hard for immigrants, family planning (particularly Planned Parenthood), civil rights groups. In short he will be tough on the weak and solicitous for the rich and powerful (particularly white).
In 2008, everyone turned out to elect President Obama, then in 2010 they stayed at home. The republicans took the Congress and obstructed everything they could. Many voters said that "Obama couldn't accomplish anything so we need to vote republican."
4
Again the Republican Economic Triad promise prevailed - Lower taxes, higher defense spending and lower deficits.
Of course the first two promises preempt the third but that is only in a rational world, not the one where so many voters chose to live.
Even before the election many Trump voters-to-be lived in states where the GOP controlled legislatures rejected federally subsided health care expansion denying them coverage. This did not matter to them. They were angry and wanted change.
And change they got - control of the Legislative and Executive branches of government and soon the Judicial as a bonus.
And so our country trudges forward beyond campaign promises to the challenges of everyday governance.
Trump will soon be our President but he does not own the U.S, we the people do and he (and the GOP) must be held accountable for their stewardship of our great country.
Of course the first two promises preempt the third but that is only in a rational world, not the one where so many voters chose to live.
Even before the election many Trump voters-to-be lived in states where the GOP controlled legislatures rejected federally subsided health care expansion denying them coverage. This did not matter to them. They were angry and wanted change.
And change they got - control of the Legislative and Executive branches of government and soon the Judicial as a bonus.
And so our country trudges forward beyond campaign promises to the challenges of everyday governance.
Trump will soon be our President but he does not own the U.S, we the people do and he (and the GOP) must be held accountable for their stewardship of our great country.
3
Clinton won by a margin of millions, and an Electoral College that follows its obligation to protect us from bad choices will refuse to override the people's choice in this case. That's the most important thing.
As for the loser Trump's appeal, he positioned himself as the outsider underdog who expressed the anger of losers, blamed their losses on "those other people," promised revenge ("Lock her up!"), and, based on his success in the pursuit of money, sex, power and fame, convinced them that he alone could turn them into winners. As in believe me and Tump U!
As for the loser Trump's appeal, he positioned himself as the outsider underdog who expressed the anger of losers, blamed their losses on "those other people," promised revenge ("Lock her up!"), and, based on his success in the pursuit of money, sex, power and fame, convinced them that he alone could turn them into winners. As in believe me and Tump U!
2
Paul argues that the Democrat's message was sound. It was. The messenger, on the other hand, was pretty terrible.
Sure, nothing prosecutable was ever found with the goings-on at her foundation or email server. Nevertheless, the optics of secret half-million dollar speeches to Wall Street, endless fundraisers with billionaires and the roster of people who donated to the Clinton Foundation while dealing with a State Department she headed was horrible. Even without spin it reeked of insincerity. And she never needed a second invitation to go to a war.
As for charisma and likability she is the opposite of our current President. She has none. This matters. No product or policy or position paper ever sold itself. Somone has to crack the door open first.
The Clintons need to get out of the way and make room for someone like, do you remember an articulate whip-smart young Southern governor 30 years ago who single-handedly turned a fuddy-duddy Democratic party around, storming into the WH in the process?
Sure, nothing prosecutable was ever found with the goings-on at her foundation or email server. Nevertheless, the optics of secret half-million dollar speeches to Wall Street, endless fundraisers with billionaires and the roster of people who donated to the Clinton Foundation while dealing with a State Department she headed was horrible. Even without spin it reeked of insincerity. And she never needed a second invitation to go to a war.
As for charisma and likability she is the opposite of our current President. She has none. This matters. No product or policy or position paper ever sold itself. Somone has to crack the door open first.
The Clintons need to get out of the way and make room for someone like, do you remember an articulate whip-smart young Southern governor 30 years ago who single-handedly turned a fuddy-duddy Democratic party around, storming into the WH in the process?
8
"To be honest, I don’t fully understand this resentment. "
That's apparent. But rather than make you step further into flyover country you can take a look at comments on this board in response to OP-ED pieces on illegal immigration.
There were responses from places like Long Island and Staten Island that called from more deportations of illegal immigrant gang members plaguing their neighborhoods. They pleaded for the NY Times to at least acknowledge that illegal immigrants exist. (Occasionally this does occur). This is not driven by xenophobia or racism.
None of these concerns are addressed by Obamacare or tax breaks for working class people. However the concerns can lead to a wholesale breakdown in neighborhoods and send property values plunging or at least not keeping up with inflation or the cost of moving to a new safer locations. This will more readily impact lower middle class folks who have less of a safety cushion to fall back on. Every once in awhile you will read comments to this effect from Chicago.
Working class folks are concerned about race-based social programs and for good reasons. But Krugman, you won't get a real sense of that in your morning runs through the park where all is well with the republic.
BTW, anytime you are in the Detroit area, let me know, I'll introduce you to folks who voted for Trump. They can explain things to you more clearly. And no, the neighborhoods we visit are not lily white.
That's apparent. But rather than make you step further into flyover country you can take a look at comments on this board in response to OP-ED pieces on illegal immigration.
There were responses from places like Long Island and Staten Island that called from more deportations of illegal immigrant gang members plaguing their neighborhoods. They pleaded for the NY Times to at least acknowledge that illegal immigrants exist. (Occasionally this does occur). This is not driven by xenophobia or racism.
None of these concerns are addressed by Obamacare or tax breaks for working class people. However the concerns can lead to a wholesale breakdown in neighborhoods and send property values plunging or at least not keeping up with inflation or the cost of moving to a new safer locations. This will more readily impact lower middle class folks who have less of a safety cushion to fall back on. Every once in awhile you will read comments to this effect from Chicago.
Working class folks are concerned about race-based social programs and for good reasons. But Krugman, you won't get a real sense of that in your morning runs through the park where all is well with the republic.
BTW, anytime you are in the Detroit area, let me know, I'll introduce you to folks who voted for Trump. They can explain things to you more clearly. And no, the neighborhoods we visit are not lily white.
14
"Speak softly and carry a big stick." summed up Teddy Roosevelt's foreign policy.
"Lie loudly and often; then "ratchet down from rabid," as Blow puts it, is Trump policy.
Trumpspeak is Newspeak updated--Logic, truth, rationality--as in Academia, Courts, Profession and Crafts--all get undermined by marketing.
Logic fatigue sets in. Contradiction counting gets boring. Truth slides into "true for me" which is mere belief--true or false. Knowledge becomes irrelevant.
Politics is always partly theater. "The People" need preternatural motivation to be ruled by imperfect rulers. Thus theatrics and fiction--god story fiction, aristocracy--royal blood fiction, race supremacy fiction, gender supremacy fiction, folk wisdom fiction, social justice fiction, trickle down fiction--on and on.
Conservatives--i.e. plutocrats, moneyballers--including the Clinton's--pushed America as meritocracy and money as La Dolce Vita for so long The People think inherited wealth is proof of intelligence and a healthy grip on reality. Logic gets replaced by marketing.
Soon it will be illegal--at least punishable--to remember what Trump said last time.
"Live in the moment" will be sold as nirvana. Reality itself will be limited to the specious present--History limited to journalism, journalism to the daily news. The past will not only cease to exist, it will be rude to recall it--as disrespect for the office of President.
"Lie loudly and often; then "ratchet down from rabid," as Blow puts it, is Trump policy.
Trumpspeak is Newspeak updated--Logic, truth, rationality--as in Academia, Courts, Profession and Crafts--all get undermined by marketing.
Logic fatigue sets in. Contradiction counting gets boring. Truth slides into "true for me" which is mere belief--true or false. Knowledge becomes irrelevant.
Politics is always partly theater. "The People" need preternatural motivation to be ruled by imperfect rulers. Thus theatrics and fiction--god story fiction, aristocracy--royal blood fiction, race supremacy fiction, gender supremacy fiction, folk wisdom fiction, social justice fiction, trickle down fiction--on and on.
Conservatives--i.e. plutocrats, moneyballers--including the Clinton's--pushed America as meritocracy and money as La Dolce Vita for so long The People think inherited wealth is proof of intelligence and a healthy grip on reality. Logic gets replaced by marketing.
Soon it will be illegal--at least punishable--to remember what Trump said last time.
"Live in the moment" will be sold as nirvana. Reality itself will be limited to the specious present--History limited to journalism, journalism to the daily news. The past will not only cease to exist, it will be rude to recall it--as disrespect for the office of President.
5
Let's be honest here. The GOP has, in a conscience coordinated effort, 60 years vilifying African Americans as a group, picturing welfare as a total failure, defining government as "the problem," joyously saying liberals are out of touch "elites," and the most pressing concern is the deficit so that they can push a tax cut starvation of all safety net programs. There has been a constant drumbeat about how the private sector can do everything better which has led to the privatizing of prisons, the push to "voucher" our schools, and "voucher" medicare as well as 401K Soc. Sec. All of this with only a flimsy fig leaf of data (some real and some just plain made up). Democrats have not been on a consistent message for any length of time. So no wonder the non-college white population turns to the GOP. A GOP that stabs them in the back at almost every turn by providing "bogeyman" targets like welfare queens, Muslims, and liberals. When truth becomes whatever anyone says the most vulnerable and least educated will buy it.
7
Professor Krugman, you are way off. First, Hillary was a terrible campaigner for working class white voters. Do you really think Sanders was arguing for policy based campaigning? Second, you don't understand resentment of D.C. elites getting literally paid by Wall Street banks? Really? Stop attacking your fellow liberals. Obamacare was small, undersold, and didn't kick in in a timely matter. Stop praising the too little too late like it was some kind of economic miracle.
4
When Democratic tv commenters and surrogates routinely use the terms racism, sexism, xenophobia, homophobia, etc. in a single sentence with no mention of the white middle and working class, is it surprising that many of those white folks, in whose lives such concerns seem invisible and irrelevant, feel ignored and disrespected? It was inevitable that the Democrats lost big chunks of that group after the hippies, antiwar protests and civil rights legislation in the 60's, but it's time to bring them back in an organized way. This means policies that truly help ordinary folks, but also speaking inclusively. You can work with determination to stop police shootings of unarmed blacks and all the other horrendous abuses out there without calling Trump supporters racist and seeming to value minority groups more than the rest. Yes Hillary's campaign was beset by unfair media coverage, the FBI hachet job, and the ever-present vast right-wing conspiracy (and apparently the Russians), but her identity-scolding didn't help.
3
My hope in all of the evaluations of why Trump won is that we don't lose sight of the role of sexism. I say there are plenty in the category of uneducated white people who greatly resent a white woman even running for president. It's instant hate.
7
45 percent of college-educated white women voted for Trump. How does that fit into your narrative?
2
Sixty-three percent of non-educated white woman voted for Trump. The point being more white non-college educated people voted for Trump. Two points: sexism can exist in men or women, and, I'm not expecting sexism to be the full explanation for Clintons' loss, but is one factor not to overlook.
1
Since the 70's. if not before. the populist wing of the Democratic party has become stronger within the party by pushing social policies which are abhorrent to the white working class. Issues such as abortion rights, same sex marriage, criminal justice reform, etc. are at the heart of their social policy and that is what many of this group vote on, not 'rational economic policy'.
When FDR made the Democrats the party of the working class, it was on the issues of jobs and social security, not equal rights. The majority of this group are socially conservative and look down on the 'effete intellectual snobs' of the Northeast and the Left Coast, and these are the forces they identify the current Democratic party with. Just look at where they won big to prove it.
FDR campaigned on putting people to work, Ms. Clinton campaigned on putting the coal companies out of business. FDR had fireside chats with his fellow Americans, Ms, Clinton referred to them as 'a basket of deplorables'. Her campaign played well to her group, but not the the fly over states, and one can see the results.
When FDR made the Democrats the party of the working class, it was on the issues of jobs and social security, not equal rights. The majority of this group are socially conservative and look down on the 'effete intellectual snobs' of the Northeast and the Left Coast, and these are the forces they identify the current Democratic party with. Just look at where they won big to prove it.
FDR campaigned on putting people to work, Ms. Clinton campaigned on putting the coal companies out of business. FDR had fireside chats with his fellow Americans, Ms, Clinton referred to them as 'a basket of deplorables'. Her campaign played well to her group, but not the the fly over states, and one can see the results.
4
In your last paragraph you are parroting right-wing propaganda chapter and verse. You should look at the context of those remarks and you will see just how incorrect you are. She did not campaign on what you said. And if this is why you think she lost, you are just wrong.
1
Gotta agree. Had she just reached out to them in a meaningful way, many would have followed. How could she call 49% of voters deplorable? Who is she, Mitt Romney?
This election was about the economy, as perceived by the population. From what I heard from people in PA, NJ, DE and other states I travel, the 2 main worrying factors were: income inequality, and the continuing decline of the middle class in the U.S. I know these are interrelated, but that is what I heard.
We all know how Bernie tackled income inequality head-on, from the outset, by targeting Wall Street. But, he also addressed issues related to the decline of the middle class, by demanding clarification on the TPP terms since its inception, as well as supporting minimum wage raises.
I also heard from many middle-class professionals about the abuse of programs such as H1-B visas. I have visited many companies throughout the U.S. and seen the immense influx of IT professionals from abroad. Most of them do jobs that used to belong to an American professional. Most companies claim a dire need for skilled workers, but in fact prefer to hire someone from abroad with 1 year experience in a new technology, rather than allow an American professional to retrain in a few months to do the job.
The same is not true elsewhere: as examples, France, Germany, Australia and Brazil, have government policies that protect their workforce.
Those policies have consequences. People like Trump and Bernie correctly talked to people's concerns.
I don't think this is populism. It is alignment with what matters.
We all know how Bernie tackled income inequality head-on, from the outset, by targeting Wall Street. But, he also addressed issues related to the decline of the middle class, by demanding clarification on the TPP terms since its inception, as well as supporting minimum wage raises.
I also heard from many middle-class professionals about the abuse of programs such as H1-B visas. I have visited many companies throughout the U.S. and seen the immense influx of IT professionals from abroad. Most of them do jobs that used to belong to an American professional. Most companies claim a dire need for skilled workers, but in fact prefer to hire someone from abroad with 1 year experience in a new technology, rather than allow an American professional to retrain in a few months to do the job.
The same is not true elsewhere: as examples, France, Germany, Australia and Brazil, have government policies that protect their workforce.
Those policies have consequences. People like Trump and Bernie correctly talked to people's concerns.
I don't think this is populism. It is alignment with what matters.
9
Thank you, as always, pointing out one by one with systematic and rational explanation. Hah! Emails? I witnessed the Death of Journalism during election coverage killed by Capitalism!
Undereducated white in red states are not exception, even Bernie supporters get wrong. They are still bitter about losing but I paid attention during the primary debates thinking, was I missing something in finding his popularity among my surrounding and I concluded that he was good at diagnosis but, thin in policy or solution. One debate was enough to hear his pitching with same two liners. Hillary was like a thick book to read through but comparing all candidates, she was by far the best and serious, giving herself all to govern the country with messy and complex issues.
BTW: her sin and weakness are not her emails or inability to connect, but her in-born disability: Female.
Sadly, Again, beyond educated, uneducated, the media is long gone, including NYT and there is no hope for next time, people, unless we figure out what to do with our current culture of not listening.
Undereducated white in red states are not exception, even Bernie supporters get wrong. They are still bitter about losing but I paid attention during the primary debates thinking, was I missing something in finding his popularity among my surrounding and I concluded that he was good at diagnosis but, thin in policy or solution. One debate was enough to hear his pitching with same two liners. Hillary was like a thick book to read through but comparing all candidates, she was by far the best and serious, giving herself all to govern the country with messy and complex issues.
BTW: her sin and weakness are not her emails or inability to connect, but her in-born disability: Female.
Sadly, Again, beyond educated, uneducated, the media is long gone, including NYT and there is no hope for next time, people, unless we figure out what to do with our current culture of not listening.
5
For the Trump supporters who keep commenting that it's meaningless that Clinton received 2 million more votes than their candidate, you may want to at least take a moment to reflect on the fact that you were, and remain, in the minority of Americans. Rather than gloat, have a sense of humility that the majority of Americans voted against your candidate and his policies. In fact, if you look at who Trump is appointing and nominating to fill various cabinet and advisory posts, they are much more in the "elite" and 1% camp than Obama's are. If you are going to be true to your and Trump's original values and policies as stated during the campaign, why not join the Clinton supporters who are protesting some of the elitist choices Trump has made since the election?
4
You should weigh what Trump promised that he might not be able to deliver (i.e., bring back jobs to coal country) to what HRC promised and everyone believed she would deliver - "“We're going to put a lot of coal miners and coal companies out of business.”
I suspect Trump won coal country because the miners believed Hillary more than they believed him.
I suspect Trump won coal country because the miners believed Hillary more than they believed him.
2
I disagree. The situation in Canada provides an interesting control group. What are the three main differences - a serious social safety net in Canada. a much more diverse society in Canada and the failure of the US to punish, hang and/or exile the treasonous Confederates. The endemic racism in the US owes much to slavery, Jim Crow and the failure of the US to punish treason, kidnapping, murder, and genocidal policies directed against, among others, African Americans and First Nations.
3
Trump is a salesman and he did what comes second nature to some of the best in this field. He put on his selling hat but unethically crossed the line by knowingly telling lies and making promises that are not possible to keep. But they worked as measured by winning the election.
Now he has to put on his delivery hat. Hyperbole is out and he will be spinning why he isn't delivering on his lies and false promises.
Now he has to put on his delivery hat. Hyperbole is out and he will be spinning why he isn't delivering on his lies and false promises.
2
We are looking at the answer but choose not to see it. Many Americans, be they college educated or not, white or not, male or not, are fed up and angry. It’s about salesmanship and Trump, if nothing else, is a salesman. Trump’s success has been in his abilities to understand what others want. Tell people what they want to hear. Promises? Make them, break them. American politics 101. Having a hard time figuring things out? We need to stop thinking so much and just look. Yes, the answer is staring us in the face, but we choose not to look.
3
With regard to liberal disdain, I wish someone could once and for all explain right wing disdain for Hillary. She has been personally and shamelessly smeared for 25 years. Whitewater, Benghazi, Emails. She must be one of the most investigated politicians in history, but what did any of those inquiries ever yield. Nothing. And still she remained committed to serving her country. I have always believed her to be honorable. Apparently a majority of voters believed the same thing despite 25 years of shameless smears.
5
Simple. She talks down to us. She calls us deplorable, sexist, racist, uninformed. That's no way to gain broad based support.
1
people think in one world and live in another. the west virginia coal miners are voting in the world where they think, not the one they actually live in.
1
To trade children's health insurance for the possibility of a job in a coal mine seems pretty short sighted to me. Who benefits from that?
5
Call me a part of the problem but when millions of proud racists work in concert with non racists to elect a man who is clearly racist why shouldn't I look down on those people?
Oh I'm not supposed to think that because the non racists have real grievances that we need to understand? Give me a break! Electing a racist who promises to give you a job does not make you an innocent player in the rise of bigotry in this country.
Also I'm sorry but I have very little sympathy for people working in the fossil fuel industry. Their livelihood is killing the entire planet. The government is supposed to do MORE to create jobs in an industry that's driving this planet into extinction? Are you kidding me? So what...the coal jobs return to their former glory and save a few rural towns but then that same coal industry dooms the entire planet? What madness is this? Destroy the planet in order to save the local rural economy? If this is the world we're living in then we deserve what we get.
Oh I'm not supposed to think that because the non racists have real grievances that we need to understand? Give me a break! Electing a racist who promises to give you a job does not make you an innocent player in the rise of bigotry in this country.
Also I'm sorry but I have very little sympathy for people working in the fossil fuel industry. Their livelihood is killing the entire planet. The government is supposed to do MORE to create jobs in an industry that's driving this planet into extinction? Are you kidding me? So what...the coal jobs return to their former glory and save a few rural towns but then that same coal industry dooms the entire planet? What madness is this? Destroy the planet in order to save the local rural economy? If this is the world we're living in then we deserve what we get.
5
Come on--she basically preached to the coastal choir. And there Krugman goes again, in essentially bashing Sanders. Krugman could cherry-pick factors to his heart's content, but it won't get around how those people were neglected and even ridiculed (as was Sanders). Leaving them to their own devices, it risked a simple "white-lash." I have a less "deplorable" opinion about them and how their lives would be touched by a thorough, sincere outreach. This HRC apologist has to use some mental acrobatics to get around being one of the smug, arrogant, and most stubborn supporters. Faw!
3
One thing is clear, however: Democrats have to figure out why the white working class just voted overwhelmingly against its own economic interests, not pretend that a bit more populism would solve the problem.
I've already figured it out: the white working class is ignorant and stupid. They wear their 100 IQs on the their shirtsleeves as a badge of honor.
I've already figured it out: the white working class is ignorant and stupid. They wear their 100 IQs on the their shirtsleeves as a badge of honor.
4
Yeh! Remember 50% of the population is below average.
2
While we are not aparticularly stupid people, we are terribly short sighted and overwhelmingly self centered.
Our nation is young and we have yet to understand our royalty.
Our nation is young and we have yet to understand our royalty.
2
Nearly every comment here has the same formulation: "white working class are so stupid they don't know what's good for them". It's incredibly condescending and arrogant. It's not surprising at all they voted for someone as flawed as Trump.
18
And there is the great paradox. Democrats are policy allies of the white working class, from the New Deal, Social Security and Medicare, to Federal infrastructure spending, jobs training, and asking the wealthy to pay their fair share of taxes. So the white working class voted for Reagan and W, who created greater income inequality through tax cuts for the rich, and now Trump, who pays no taxes. And yes we arrogantly judge such self-destructive behavior, and recoil at the appeals to scapegoating that we think partly motivate it. Please, tell us what we should do? Seriously. You have our attention.
6
Recently I read the late Joe Bageant's "Deer Hunting with Jesus." Bageant, who grew up in an Appalachian town and returned there after a thirty-year absence, writes about the people he knew in his youth, what has happened to them, and why they think the way they do.
One point he brought up was that every town has its own elites and that they run the local schools. They may talk about "quality education," but what they really mean is just enough training to be a competent and compliant worker bees, not enough education to think and question the status quo. (In fact, students who are inclined to think and question rarely stay in those small towns.)
Add to that thirty-some years of unrelenting hate programming on AM radio, never countered by the left in any way that the AM audiences could accept, and you have people who are justifiably angry but not knowledgeable and prone to blame their problems on precisely the people who are NOT responsible for their plight.
At the same time, right-wing propaganda has nurtured a sort of Stockholm syndrome with respect to the super rich. In this mythology, people like Donald Trump are billionaires "because they worked hard," and it is "unfair" to tax them to support "gangbangers, welfare mothers, and illegal immigrants," all of whom spend their entire lives on cushy benefits, or so the myth makers tell their audiences.
The Democrats need to consult locals to figure out how to approach this population.
One point he brought up was that every town has its own elites and that they run the local schools. They may talk about "quality education," but what they really mean is just enough training to be a competent and compliant worker bees, not enough education to think and question the status quo. (In fact, students who are inclined to think and question rarely stay in those small towns.)
Add to that thirty-some years of unrelenting hate programming on AM radio, never countered by the left in any way that the AM audiences could accept, and you have people who are justifiably angry but not knowledgeable and prone to blame their problems on precisely the people who are NOT responsible for their plight.
At the same time, right-wing propaganda has nurtured a sort of Stockholm syndrome with respect to the super rich. In this mythology, people like Donald Trump are billionaires "because they worked hard," and it is "unfair" to tax them to support "gangbangers, welfare mothers, and illegal immigrants," all of whom spend their entire lives on cushy benefits, or so the myth makers tell their audiences.
The Democrats need to consult locals to figure out how to approach this population.
7
Donald Trump won the voters of places like Clay County because he did what Democrats are always accused of doing--promising people "free stuff," Paul Ryan's phrase for welfare benefits and entitlement programs. Only here the people getting the promised stuff are low-income whites, not minorities, and the stuff they're being promised are good-paying blue collar jobs that the economy doesn't need any more. Some of these folks seem to think the economy owes them a $60,000 a year job on a high school education. Not only are they unwilling to invest in themselves to get the skills and training the jobs of today demand, but they resent people who did all that, have good jobs, live in cities, and constitute a new "elite" that supposedly lords it over "real Americans." Along comes Donald Trump promising to put the "elite" in its place and return the "real Americans" to their former glory and they eat it up with a spoon.
10
US has long had policies like free trade which in turn has led to US job exodus, since the 70's. Big business hasn't kept up with updating outdated equipment, and such instead doing everything on the cheap, which included our greatest export US jobs. It's all about the shareholders. Well there goes our tax base. So instead shift taxes to imports, which will include higher prices for foreign goods.
US workers(and world workers) will soon see automation as the new competition. Tax these heavily maybe 75%. US workers are in trouble no matter who won the election. It's always about the economy stupid.
However law and order and freedom of expression(perceived offensive insults by some) in US are under attack, due to riots and multiculturalism, which is probably why Trump won. Don't overlook this! Strange but the peaceful North Dakota DAPL protests doesn't make the mainstream news. And you wonder why Trumpsters don't trust the main stream media!
That said we should all watch Trump administration like a hawk to see how he balances the budget. If you cut taxes, cut all tax loopholes for the wealthy. a flat tax would be perfect just have the tax floor start at $20,000 or so. That would also eliminate the IRS and the lobbyists, who are always angling for new ways to get tax exemptions.
That said, Stop being sheeple people and go against the mainstream agenda. This independent man doesn't trust Trump either. We shall see.
US workers(and world workers) will soon see automation as the new competition. Tax these heavily maybe 75%. US workers are in trouble no matter who won the election. It's always about the economy stupid.
However law and order and freedom of expression(perceived offensive insults by some) in US are under attack, due to riots and multiculturalism, which is probably why Trump won. Don't overlook this! Strange but the peaceful North Dakota DAPL protests doesn't make the mainstream news. And you wonder why Trumpsters don't trust the main stream media!
That said we should all watch Trump administration like a hawk to see how he balances the budget. If you cut taxes, cut all tax loopholes for the wealthy. a flat tax would be perfect just have the tax floor start at $20,000 or so. That would also eliminate the IRS and the lobbyists, who are always angling for new ways to get tax exemptions.
That said, Stop being sheeple people and go against the mainstream agenda. This independent man doesn't trust Trump either. We shall see.
The most vulnerable and disillusioned will always be most susceptible to demagoguery if demagogues have a narrative to which they can cling. Ronald Reagan laid the foundation of the US conservative narrative with his "nine most terrifying words...." and he and his successors have parlayed that into tax cuts, deregulation, privatization schemes (military, prisons, education, healthcare) and corporate handouts to create the neo-feudal economy in which we now live. Trump's imminent presidency is the product of a vast poorly educated (taught to the test, not how to think) segment of the electorate not understanding that the only resource of great wealth (land, resources, owned assets, power, and influence) of which they can and should be truly equal shareholders is a democratically elected government which is not hijacked by moneyed special interests. A compelling and embraceable counter-narrative is needed to extinguish the "othering" of our government itself if we want working class people to stop voting against "the government" and thus their own self interest.
1
I think they just wanted to show congress their disdain. There was no logical reason for them to be so angry at democrats. Republicans have been whipping up anger at unions for years now, even when unions fight for higher wages for workers, and higher benefits. Republicans whipped up anger at a health care law that, very simply, made it possible for everyone to have health care. You would think that was a good thing. Wall Street completely crashed the economy, so democrats put regulations in place to prevent such a thing from happening again. Republicans have convinced the American public that such protections are a bad thing. And we have apparently forgotten that it was a republican governor who called for the Flint Water Authority to draw its water from the Flint River rather than the treated Detroit water, poisoned all those children and then tried to hide it.
The American people, in trying to fix the corruption in Washington, perversely voted to make it worse. They gave the whole kit and caboodle away. And now they will pay the price. Goodbye EPA, goodbye Medicare, goodbye public education. The list goes on. We should all be afraid.
The American people, in trying to fix the corruption in Washington, perversely voted to make it worse. They gave the whole kit and caboodle away. And now they will pay the price. Goodbye EPA, goodbye Medicare, goodbye public education. The list goes on. We should all be afraid.
4
We're in the Indian-summer that usually follows presidential elections. But make no mistake, there will be crises to test the mettle and resolve of presidents. These include:
-- A racial conflaguration in multiple American cities, as in 1968.
-- An act of terrorism, minor or major, in America or abroad, like 9/11.
-- An international incident challenging American interests, like the North Korean seizure of an American naval ship.
-- An economic down slowly ratcheting up the pain on all Americans, like 2008.
-- A scandal that reaches the president, like Watergate.
It's not out of the question that several or all could occur simultaneously.
Only then will we learn whether we made a catastrophic mistake in electing a man of Donald Trump's volcanic temperament.
-- A racial conflaguration in multiple American cities, as in 1968.
-- An act of terrorism, minor or major, in America or abroad, like 9/11.
-- An international incident challenging American interests, like the North Korean seizure of an American naval ship.
-- An economic down slowly ratcheting up the pain on all Americans, like 2008.
-- A scandal that reaches the president, like Watergate.
It's not out of the question that several or all could occur simultaneously.
Only then will we learn whether we made a catastrophic mistake in electing a man of Donald Trump's volcanic temperament.
2
The working class needs the Wall Street Democrats like a fish needs a bicycle.
Every other major democracy has a labour, socialist or social democratic party of the left.
The U.S. is engaged in an intense class war that is being won by parasitic plutocrats. To preserve the working and middle classes requires a left party that will fight against the insolence and sadism of the overclass, bringing them down.
Every other major democracy has a labour, socialist or social democratic party of the left.
The U.S. is engaged in an intense class war that is being won by parasitic plutocrats. To preserve the working and middle classes requires a left party that will fight against the insolence and sadism of the overclass, bringing them down.
7
Krugman had a major, perhaps the decisive role in electing Trump because of this kind of piece in the past in which he encouraged Clinton in her ignorance and prejudice. Now he is trying to wipe out the Democrats in Congress in 2018. I have never read a columnist who is so thoroughly ignorant about America or so contemptuous of the average American. Has he thought of moving Australia or Iraq where, as Friedman told Bush on these pages, there are no religious conflicts or other terrible identity politics and a good market economy?
2
It is really pretty elemental:
Not being heard or being outright ignored.
Status quo verses the possibility of SOMETHING, anything that might actually work.
This while HRC was clearly about the status quo warmed over and the establishment.
People in general seriously really fed up with politics as usual. Its not about the specifics of policy A, or B, or C, its about how the business of government doesn’t get done — over, and over, and over.
Trump as a brash outlier, however outlandish or offensive, was the only option to that had any chance of upending and possibly outing the political in-crowd and the K-Street collusion that so blatantly dominates the process.
Solution:
Candidly identify and address the seminal problems that confront the nation — paramount among them being a two party system that has done far more to bring about our diametric division and endemic partisanship and winner take all political mentality, than to effect the desperately needed political reformation.
Not being heard or being outright ignored.
Status quo verses the possibility of SOMETHING, anything that might actually work.
This while HRC was clearly about the status quo warmed over and the establishment.
People in general seriously really fed up with politics as usual. Its not about the specifics of policy A, or B, or C, its about how the business of government doesn’t get done — over, and over, and over.
Trump as a brash outlier, however outlandish or offensive, was the only option to that had any chance of upending and possibly outing the political in-crowd and the K-Street collusion that so blatantly dominates the process.
Solution:
Candidly identify and address the seminal problems that confront the nation — paramount among them being a two party system that has done far more to bring about our diametric division and endemic partisanship and winner take all political mentality, than to effect the desperately needed political reformation.
2
The problem is that change creates winners and losers. The solution is not to try to stop change, but for the winners to take better care of the losers.
1
There are two types of Americans: those who have investments and those who don't. If you are watching your investment portfolio, the Obama era has been a wonderful eight years. You have seen your net worth grow by double digits. If you live on a salary or are an hourly employee, you have seen your net worth stagnate or decline. Trump said he is going to force Carrier to keep its factory in Indiana, because that is what the 1,200 employees (voters) wanted to hear. But the decision to move the factory was made by representatives of United Technologies' much more numerous shareholders. In the final analysis, the holders of capital rule the country; not labor and those who purport to represent it. I don't see anything likely to change this, nor do I see much evidence that the average, non-investment owning American is really aware of who it is that is screwing him.
3
PK, are you really this clueless about politics? People don't choose whom to vote for by comparing white papers, they compare personalities. Trump acted and sounded like the underclass, so they voted for him. If Dems don't learn to play this game they're going to be wandering in the wilderness for a long time.
The media just reports on what they think people want to heat about. Scandals still always sell better than policy. Maybe if Obama had prosecuted some financiers or torturers the Dems wouldn't have suffered by such a scandal gap.
The media just reports on what they think people want to heat about. Scandals still always sell better than policy. Maybe if Obama had prosecuted some financiers or torturers the Dems wouldn't have suffered by such a scandal gap.
Poverty and ill health due to lack of healthcare seem like a steep price for the chance to scratch that racism itch which the Republicans offer poor white voters. It seems to be worth it to them. I can't figure it out, but I guess I am just a clueless coastal elitist.
3
Krugman makes two major errors today. First, he erroneously assumes that a populist position can only be strategic and "pretending". Second, he thinks that one cannot simultanously take a populist position and seek to figure out why the White working class acts as it does.
It is fantasy to think that Comey's letter to Congress was the reason Hillary Clinton did not win the election. Hillary Clinton was the reason she lost. She was the worst candidate to run at this time in history. She ran a horrible campaign, all reactive with no vision. She tried to make the campaign about Trump's character, which was clearly awful, but his appeal went to the issues he talked about and his phony role as an outsider who would blow up the system. Hillary's campaign fed right into this. Every time she attacked his character - which is most of what she did - those who wanted someone to blow up what was viewed as a corrupt insider system - saw Trump as an outsider who was being attacked by that system trying to preserve itself. They did not care about his character if he would shake things up. While I don't agree with that mindset the Clinton campaign (and the DNC "leadership") failed to take cognizance of it and failed to understand that there are a lot of regular folks out there who are hurting and feeling like they are not being heard. Comey's letter meant little or nothing in the end.
I followed the GOP's obsession and the media's death grip on the email server mess. I can attest when Comey revealed the reopening of the investigation 10 days before the election it was a wind out of the sails week for this Hillary supporter .
1
After the crash of 2008, the working class needed a jobs program , not the health care program Obama and the Dems offered. What would you rather have, a job or health insurance? The working class was left adrift, the 2008 decision was the latest in a series of anti working class actions by both the Bush and Clinton administrations. Sending over car manufacturing to Japan was the worst. This was a good deal for Wall Street and the Fed- Japan invested in the US and supported dollar currency. Bad for workers who saw their livelihoods outsourced to Japan
2
Pail Krugman writes that the likes of Bernie sanders have said "What’s needed, he said, are candidates who understand that working-class incomes are down, who will “stand up to Wall Street, to the insurance companies, to the drug companies, to the fossil fuel industry.”
Paul Kugman disgarees. Very smart man then. Just another useless economist.
Paul Kugman disgarees. Very smart man then. Just another useless economist.
In effect, the Democrats have actually been trying to legislate for: “…(increasing) working-class incomes are down (by raising the minimum wage) , who will “stand up to Wall Street (Dodd-Frank, to rein-in the banks), to the insurance companies (National, rather than patch-work State legislation), to the drug companies (Affordable Care Act and others measures), to the fossil fuel industry (against offshore drilling, Global Warming, Renewables, etc.) .” The problem is that sound-bites are what gets people attention, not rational discussion and monkish factoids.
There is a certain “gullibility” factor that is hard to defend against. “Don’t Trump WILL (insert your own outlandish lie), Donald Trump is a businessman (a Dictator, who committed fraud, scammed people right-and-left), etc, etc, etc. Also, the media covered every one of his choreographed “love-ins”, namely because the town turns-out when the circus come to town.
Let’s hope that the true Trumpians—not the ones in the sheets, the red arm-band brown-shirts, the gun-whackos—but, the ones with he high gullibility quotient will notice: his “Infrastructure” projects with workers brought in from Spain and China, the skyrocketing of those “everyday low prices” imported from China, Honduras and Vietnam, and the National Guard Checkpoints near at every major street corner.
But, four years is a long time. Can the World survive it?
https://thetruthoncommonsense.com
There is a certain “gullibility” factor that is hard to defend against. “Don’t Trump WILL (insert your own outlandish lie), Donald Trump is a businessman (a Dictator, who committed fraud, scammed people right-and-left), etc, etc, etc. Also, the media covered every one of his choreographed “love-ins”, namely because the town turns-out when the circus come to town.
Let’s hope that the true Trumpians—not the ones in the sheets, the red arm-band brown-shirts, the gun-whackos—but, the ones with he high gullibility quotient will notice: his “Infrastructure” projects with workers brought in from Spain and China, the skyrocketing of those “everyday low prices” imported from China, Honduras and Vietnam, and the National Guard Checkpoints near at every major street corner.
But, four years is a long time. Can the World survive it?
https://thetruthoncommonsense.com
That's the scary thing! Hopes for a turnaround in voter allegiance when they realise they've been duped may never happen because none of it seems to be rooted in rational argument.
2
I'm afraid the problem is worse than you think, and it is systemic. What the people need is jobs that pay enough to have a reasonable life. Those jobs don't exist now and they won't exist in the future. There is nothing for most of them to do, nor will they go peacefully to a life of government dependence. We could retrain some people and mitigate some of the damage, but retraining will not solve the systemic problem of surplus workforce. America and the world has no use for 350 million workers, no matter what they are trained to do.
No solution that I've seen proposed will solve this dilemma, and even if you could solve it, you'd have to sell your solution to desperate people who feel they're being thrown under the bus. Individuals can rise above it, but as a group, expect more of the same.
This opens they path for hucksters and demagogues, as we've seen.
Look this reality straight in they eye and come up with a solution and a way to sell it to desperate, frightened people. Good. Now you have something to sell. Good luck.
No solution that I've seen proposed will solve this dilemma, and even if you could solve it, you'd have to sell your solution to desperate people who feel they're being thrown under the bus. Individuals can rise above it, but as a group, expect more of the same.
This opens they path for hucksters and demagogues, as we've seen.
Look this reality straight in they eye and come up with a solution and a way to sell it to desperate, frightened people. Good. Now you have something to sell. Good luck.
4
Democrats need to totally change their campaign strategy. They need to be all over the country all the time spreading their message. Obama proposes a minimum wage increase and it doesn't happen? Worker retraining doesn't get funded? In every affected county - which is everywhere - billboards need to go up, computer ads need to light up, TV ads need to appear, all screaming "Day 150 of Republican Congress keeping your pay at 1970 levels!" and so on. In states that didn't expand Medicaid, the same thing. These voters are getting the right-wing message every day from Fox and radio and internet sources. They aren't turned off by Trump's nonsense about Muslims in NJ cheering 9/11 or Mexicans raping and killing us, or by fake news, because they've been hearing all that and worse on a daily basis. It's perfectly consistent with what they already know. Suddenly Clinton wants to parachute in to tell them she has a plan? Even during the campaign you didn't hear that Democrats already had a plan, but the Republican Congress thought low-low taxes and free markets and austerity had higher priority. The message needs to be conveyed daily that their governments can work for them after all, like they did briefly in 2008-9 and like they do in states with expanded Medicaid, and if they want change, they need to vote it in throughout their state and federal governments, not just the presidency.
One thing missing from this analysis is the work itself. Coal miners have a very physical job. When Hillary came in and promised retraining, they heard desk job. They don't want a desk job. They want to use their hands. They don't want a college degree, they want to use their strength.
Trump had an advantage because he has spent his life visiting construction sites. Anyone who has been on a construction site knows these people drive their life satisfaction from this physical, demanding work. Hillary may have been correct on policy, but she was wrong on jobs. Clay county doesn't want good paying jobs, they want dirty jobs.
Trump had an advantage because he has spent his life visiting construction sites. Anyone who has been on a construction site knows these people drive their life satisfaction from this physical, demanding work. Hillary may have been correct on policy, but she was wrong on jobs. Clay county doesn't want good paying jobs, they want dirty jobs.
Answers about why whites voted for Trump do not reside in personal interests. Whites voted against Black Obama and women.
Women have taken more jobs from white men than any other group. And the endless chorus of hatred spewed by Racist Republicans for the past 8 years was not going to be tolerated for one more term.
The strategy of not screaming against racism for 8 years contributed to failure. Trying to work with Republicans was foolish. Democrats embraced victims.
Women have taken more jobs from white men than any other group. And the endless chorus of hatred spewed by Racist Republicans for the past 8 years was not going to be tolerated for one more term.
The strategy of not screaming against racism for 8 years contributed to failure. Trying to work with Republicans was foolish. Democrats embraced victims.
2
"We have met the enemy, and he is us".
Our economic structure is so outdated - talk about fitting a square peg in a round hole. Couple that with the relentless GOP (greed over people) that is Republican, and things get pretty hopeless.
We have to address the issue of people's basic needs.
People were desperate for change and voted for it.
It is unlikely that this narcissistic,self serving con artist will be the answer that they were hoping for.
Our economic structure is so outdated - talk about fitting a square peg in a round hole. Couple that with the relentless GOP (greed over people) that is Republican, and things get pretty hopeless.
We have to address the issue of people's basic needs.
People were desperate for change and voted for it.
It is unlikely that this narcissistic,self serving con artist will be the answer that they were hoping for.
1
I don't know if your GOP hidden meaning "greed over people" will catch on or was original but after over 30 years of observing disinvestment in education and the great transfer of wealth to the few it strikes a resonant chord and clarion call.
1
The corporate class owns the media so why shouldn't it do its bidding to spread this dystopia? The bosses have always know that if they keep the white working stiff suspicious of the black working stiff they can pick everybody's pocket. The press is no longer the bulwark against the encroachment of oligarchy or fascism so we had better buckle up for a bumpy ride.
I used to have some empathy for these folks but it's becoming harder and harder to ignore their willful ignorance of the facts. It seems that as long as one black man gets some kind of a boost up towards equal station with them they are angry.
This is not an economic issue. It is a racial issue.
I used to have some empathy for these folks but it's becoming harder and harder to ignore their willful ignorance of the facts. It seems that as long as one black man gets some kind of a boost up towards equal station with them they are angry.
This is not an economic issue. It is a racial issue.
2
After reforms in the sixties, racism, in significant part went underground. Now, under Trump it is in full bloom.
4
This article has me perplexed. Mr. Krugman celebrates the fact that even Hillary Clinton (who generated far less enthusiasm than Bernie Sanders) won the popular vote by a weighty margin, then goes on to wonder how Democrats will ever win over more voters. The fixes obviously have to take place far above the voter level, at the legislative and judiciary levels. The two most popular politicians of the last twelve years, Bernie Sanders and Barack Obama, were a Jew and a black man, putting to rest the idea that "identity" is the primary driver of votes. Reaching back to the primaries, Mr. Krugman has been disrespectful and unaccepting of Bernie Sanders. At least Bernie proved that worker and family friendly policies move and inspire American voters. If he had not urged his supporters to vote for Hillary, her lead would have been far smaller, but he insisted they vote for her, and campaigned for her, adding countless votes to her tally.
3
In this column, Mr. Krugman seems to be unable to understand greater social relations due to his rather inflexible liberal ideology paired with a utilitarian view of economics. He is, nonetheless, very honest: "I don’t fully understand this resentment. In particular, I don’t know why imagined liberal disdain inspires so much more anger than the very real disdain of conservatives who see the poverty of places like eastern Kentucky as a sign of the personal and moral inadequacy of their residents." I would strongly encourage him to tackle some of the work by Herbert Marcuse, Jacques Lacan, and Slavoj Žižek in order to gain greater insight into how ideology is formed. The disconnect is clear: Mr. Krugman believes that Trump supporters *should* think like him, but he is not even remotely close to willing to understand why they voted the way they did.
3
All the comments seen below are interesting in the sense that everyone has an opinion and there is a wide array of differences. It is like all, including me, have their hand on an elephant but come to the conclusion that we have a donkey.
If the consensus,or lack thereof, is so off, then we deserve what we get. In a democracy the citizens have to do their part.
The sand in the machine is what has been said of the baby-boomers, namely, their philosophy of "me first". Complete lack of empathy toward the notion of Common Good.
Thank you for the people who continue to soldier on. Hopefully there are enough of them that we can weather a cohort of buffoons for 4 years.
As far as the angry people are concerned I recommend that they go and visit their nearest College or University or, at the very least, spend some time reading instead of spewing.
If the consensus,or lack thereof, is so off, then we deserve what we get. In a democracy the citizens have to do their part.
The sand in the machine is what has been said of the baby-boomers, namely, their philosophy of "me first". Complete lack of empathy toward the notion of Common Good.
Thank you for the people who continue to soldier on. Hopefully there are enough of them that we can weather a cohort of buffoons for 4 years.
As far as the angry people are concerned I recommend that they go and visit their nearest College or University or, at the very least, spend some time reading instead of spewing.
4
Democrats have to stand for something--good government, economic justice, and promoting freedom, peace, and prosperity around the world--as a clear alternative to Republican 'government is the enemy' paranoia, irresponsible and regressive taxation, fantasies of everyon's power to. Scone a 'self-made' millionaire, and 'we are the boss of you' / shake hands with the devil' foreign policy. It will take time to establish the terms of the debate after decades of cowering in the face of right-wing nonsense that has been sold so well, but this is the way forward.
1
Jobs. It's the economy, stupid. Only a fake liberal elitist living in a bubble wouldn't get it. White working class voters are smart enough not to vote for the candidate who promised more globalization, more immigration, and more of the same for the next eight years. Clinton said "America is great". Is the economy great? No. The other candidate promised to shake things up. The other candidate ran to the left of Clinton saying he would stop factories from closing. Democrats don't need a bit more populism, they need a lot more populism because they barely have any. California and New York by implementing $15/hour minimums can lead the way.
This column is so tone deaf to the yearnings of displaced and forgotten workers, it's surprising that people still pay attention to it, myself included. This economist needs to get out and talk to real people, even in New York City there are plenty of the Trump demographic who could give him an earful. The people voting against their self interest were those backing Clinton who would sell her own mother for a campaign contribution or speaking fee.
This column is so tone deaf to the yearnings of displaced and forgotten workers, it's surprising that people still pay attention to it, myself included. This economist needs to get out and talk to real people, even in New York City there are plenty of the Trump demographic who could give him an earful. The people voting against their self interest were those backing Clinton who would sell her own mother for a campaign contribution or speaking fee.
7
"Any claim that changed policy positions will win elections assumes that the public will hear about those positions. How is that supposed to happen, when most of the news media simply refuse to cover policy substance?"
And there, in a nutshell, you have the reason why the Democratic Party ended up selecting the second most unpopular presidential candidate in history in the general election, instead of the guy who was filling stadiums with crowds that dwarfed the size of Donald Trump's.
And there, in a nutshell, you have the reason why the Democratic Party ended up selecting the second most unpopular presidential candidate in history in the general election, instead of the guy who was filling stadiums with crowds that dwarfed the size of Donald Trump's.
3
I think that Donald Trump received a lot of votes in places like Clay County, KY, because he has been a popular Realty TV star. They worship him there as an authority figure. It's why he can get away with outrageous statements and outright lies. They escape their dismal real life by living in this fictional one. Donald Trump can do no wrong. If today's episode ends with a horrible situation, it will all be straightened out tomorrow. Call it the Ronald Reagan effect.
4
"I don’t fully understand this resentment. In particular, I don’t know why imagined liberal disdain inspires so much more anger than the very real disdain of conservatives who see the poverty of places like eastern Kentucky as a sign of the personal and moral inadequacy of their residents."
- but the Donald never SAID that - from down here on the ground, they (and I) see that liberal elites (including me) haven't really cared about them enough to have championed them over the last several decades, like the Democratic Party used to, as they have been left behind. Paul, I'm afraid that, as much as I admire and share your analysis, from your perch high within the liberal elite establishment, you are not able to see, and more importantly, to FEEL, this as clearly as a liberal on the ground out here.
- but the Donald never SAID that - from down here on the ground, they (and I) see that liberal elites (including me) haven't really cared about them enough to have championed them over the last several decades, like the Democratic Party used to, as they have been left behind. Paul, I'm afraid that, as much as I admire and share your analysis, from your perch high within the liberal elite establishment, you are not able to see, and more importantly, to FEEL, this as clearly as a liberal on the ground out here.
4
So which is it? Is it that the Democrats have, and will, actually support policies that will help many Trump voters, but they have been duped by the Republican media machine, or is it that the Democrats are distracted by “identity politics” and are out of touch with regular people? Or maybe both. It is difficult for me to believe that so many of my fellow citizens can be duped so badly, but Paul Krugman is right—Democratic policies are actually better for many Trump voters. For whatever reason, many people voted against their self-interest. Whether they did this because of racism or anti-abortion or anti-gay marriage ideology, or out of ignorance, it is a serious problem for democracy.
Overthinking what happened. Elections determined by turnout. Trump voters turned out. Hillary could not replicate Obama turnout where it counted re electoral college. Maybe partly her fault plus Obama fatigue, desire for something different, new. Maybe Hillary did best any Dem could do this time around. Nobody to blame. That's politics, quirks of history. Next time better focus on turnout re electoral college Dems win. Remember LBJ wipeout of Republicans in '64? Four years later Nixon in Whitehouse.
2
Finally, a sober-headed look at the aftermath. The predicament of the rust belt is nothing new and neither is the white working class who has been voting against their own interest. What made the difference in this election, beside Comey's action, was the Trump kind of demagoguery that energized that bloc into a frenzy after 8 years of black president. And Mr. Krugman is absolutely right that any (more) democratic kind of populism won't change that. What we need is the pluralization of more states in the image of CA. The midwestern identity politics, disguised as anti-identity and anti-pc, won't matter as much if/when AZ and TX are californiarized.
1
My husband and I have been talking about an explanation not mentioned in by PK or in any of the comments... The boredom of the ordinary lives of people deprived of a good education.... They don't read good books or talk with others that provide them with alternative ways of thinking. For a time, consumerism provided a kind of pseudo cultural outlet, but now that has been replaced by the narrow ideology of resentment that elected Trump.
Moreover, the poorest whites in these areas would still vote for Democrats, according to several studies.. But they don't vote. So, it's not a mystery what Democrats need to do.
Better education and get out the vote, with a focus on poor whites as well minority voters...everywhere. Howard Dean understands this. I hope the Dems are smart enough to bring him back as DNC chair.
Moreover, the poorest whites in these areas would still vote for Democrats, according to several studies.. But they don't vote. So, it's not a mystery what Democrats need to do.
Better education and get out the vote, with a focus on poor whites as well minority voters...everywhere. Howard Dean understands this. I hope the Dems are smart enough to bring him back as DNC chair.
1
Clinton failed to win a sweeping, easy victory -- a historic landslide that might finally have upended the Republican coalition -- because she was the worst Democratic nominee ever to run for the office.
After winning the nomination (with inappropriate help from the DNC), she REFUSED to speak about any of the issues that matter to people of any political persuasion. She DODGED every issue of consequence. She spoke only of one thing -- how unfit Trump was to serve.
The e-mail scandal and the related Clinton Foundation scandal were real scandals, even if the Republicans said so. Her manner of handling them satisfied most people, myself included, that she was not only dishonest, but a very poor liar who insults the intelligence of those to whom she lies.
When she was at State, she named as her principal spokesperson Victoria Nuland, who was a key adviser on foreign policy to Vice President Cheney during the (utterly immoral and ruinous) Iraq War. She praised Henry Kissinger as a mentor.
I supported her and contributed twice to her campaign because I opposed Trump and a return of the Republicans. But she was a miserable candidate. The Republicans were in full crisis, but they won everything in sight.
The Democrats will win when they champion their causes rather than tiptoe around them to avoid offending Republican moms in the suburbs. They will do better if they do not knowingly nominate ethically compromised, secretive candidates who have no message, only ambition.
After winning the nomination (with inappropriate help from the DNC), she REFUSED to speak about any of the issues that matter to people of any political persuasion. She DODGED every issue of consequence. She spoke only of one thing -- how unfit Trump was to serve.
The e-mail scandal and the related Clinton Foundation scandal were real scandals, even if the Republicans said so. Her manner of handling them satisfied most people, myself included, that she was not only dishonest, but a very poor liar who insults the intelligence of those to whom she lies.
When she was at State, she named as her principal spokesperson Victoria Nuland, who was a key adviser on foreign policy to Vice President Cheney during the (utterly immoral and ruinous) Iraq War. She praised Henry Kissinger as a mentor.
I supported her and contributed twice to her campaign because I opposed Trump and a return of the Republicans. But she was a miserable candidate. The Republicans were in full crisis, but they won everything in sight.
The Democrats will win when they champion their causes rather than tiptoe around them to avoid offending Republican moms in the suburbs. They will do better if they do not knowingly nominate ethically compromised, secretive candidates who have no message, only ambition.
6
BRAVO Mr. Krugman.
I agree wholeheartedly with the idea that the t.v. news journalists ignored the issues and promoted the sensational to increase their ratings. Maybe the recent rail by the incoming administration to the executives will open their eyes. I'm keeping my fingers crossed on that but no longer watch any t.v. news.
We can hope that distrust will spread quickly and make the next congressional elections will show a renewed interest in middle class and lower class self interest.
I agree wholeheartedly with the idea that the t.v. news journalists ignored the issues and promoted the sensational to increase their ratings. Maybe the recent rail by the incoming administration to the executives will open their eyes. I'm keeping my fingers crossed on that but no longer watch any t.v. news.
We can hope that distrust will spread quickly and make the next congressional elections will show a renewed interest in middle class and lower class self interest.
1
The Democratic Party failed in its primary task as a political party, which is to win public office and reward its supporters.
Policy is merely about the division of the spoils.
At some level, the coal miners and displaced factory workers and others know full well that their jobs aren't coming back. They also know that the Republicans will hurt them, but what matters is that others will be hurt more.
Policy is merely about the division of the spoils.
At some level, the coal miners and displaced factory workers and others know full well that their jobs aren't coming back. They also know that the Republicans will hurt them, but what matters is that others will be hurt more.
5
I and my Thanksgiving dinner guest are middle-aged, educated, white women, and we're frustrated with the democratic leadership and brainy op-ed writers who don't get why people voted for Trump.
We were laid-off from our jobs at a test publishing company 5 years ago and neither of us has found steady work since. (The work for these tax-payer funded contracts is now done in other countries like India and Mexico.)
So in my part-time, low-paying, retail job, I sell hundreds of dollars of products mostly to people who barely speak English, wear full burkas, and ask me, in broken English, to explain the quirky nature of Easter traditions.
Of course we don't want immigrants shipped home, or any religion categorically barred from the country--that's not the America we were taught to love. But is there not some way to stem the river of immigration? Is it possible to have an Affirmative Action program for middle-age, born-in-America people?
And whatever happened to the old credo, "When in Rome . . .?" It might help to smooth some edges.
Neither I nor my dinner guest could bring ourselves to vote for the nightmare of Donald Trump, but we understood some (a small fraction) of his appeal.
You can call us racist if you want, and perhaps to our shame, that's what we are, but then go ahead and dismiss our concerns and keep scratching your heads.
We were laid-off from our jobs at a test publishing company 5 years ago and neither of us has found steady work since. (The work for these tax-payer funded contracts is now done in other countries like India and Mexico.)
So in my part-time, low-paying, retail job, I sell hundreds of dollars of products mostly to people who barely speak English, wear full burkas, and ask me, in broken English, to explain the quirky nature of Easter traditions.
Of course we don't want immigrants shipped home, or any religion categorically barred from the country--that's not the America we were taught to love. But is there not some way to stem the river of immigration? Is it possible to have an Affirmative Action program for middle-age, born-in-America people?
And whatever happened to the old credo, "When in Rome . . .?" It might help to smooth some edges.
Neither I nor my dinner guest could bring ourselves to vote for the nightmare of Donald Trump, but we understood some (a small fraction) of his appeal.
You can call us racist if you want, and perhaps to our shame, that's what we are, but then go ahead and dismiss our concerns and keep scratching your heads.
7
You and your friend were laid off five years ago and now you have a low-paying, part-time job selling products to immigrants. Did you ever consider doing what these immigrants have done - moving to a new place to to improve your opportunities? For your comment, I'm hearing no self-reflection: things have been do to you and the blame belongs to others. Maybe, just maybe, that is your problem.
1
We should seriously consider what Bernie has to say. Clinton won the debates and was endorsed by every major news and media outlet, except Fox news. At the end, with the help of the FBI, Trump lied about her emails (from which she was twice cleared) and the Clinton Foundation (which is highly respected, and from which Clinton takes no funds). Also Trump's ground game was better than expected, particularly in Michigan, Wisconsin and Pennsylvania (in Colorado, I was an unaffiliated voter working for Clinton and was called on my cell by the Trump campaign on election day). Clinton lost because Democrats did not turn out in Obama numbers and people who liked neither candidate broke for Trump at the end. But Clinton was heavily disliked by voters who also rejected the Jeb Bush dynasty. Clinton's policies are better for Trump voters, but she did not tell voters why she would do to make our lives better. She was advised to take the "safer" route of criticizing Trump, which got more coverage but did not produce enthusiasm for her. I think Bernie's message of focusing on solutions to our actual major problems is the way to go. He generated tremendous voter enthusiasm during the primary, and identified the millennials, of all types, as the future of the Democratic party and the country. He also generated media coverage of his policy proposals and tapped into the desire for change that seems to have helped to elect Trump.
1
I think Krugman is correct. The vote for Trump had little to do with economic policies. It had to do with what is now being called 'identity politics'. But, that's not new. If you look at county maps of the vote, it is clear that Trump received his support from counties that have traditionally voted Republican, mostly rural and suburban counties. This has been true since at least the Reagan era. Similarly, Clinton received her support from counties that have traditionally voted Democratic.
There really wasn't much change in the geographical distribution of votes by party. It was a little bit more enthusiasm for Trump in Republican-leaning counties and a little less enthusiasm for Clinton in Democratic-leaning counties in a few critical states that determined this election.
Sure, the Democrats should widen their message to include the White, formerly industrial workers. Biden put it well in saying that the Democrats should not abandon the White, non-college educated. But, the Democratic coalition that exists is going to stronger and stronger each election cycle. In four years, the White, non-college educated population will represent about 2-3% less of the total electorate. Yes, the Republicans won this time. But, their strategy is not a good one for the long term.
There really wasn't much change in the geographical distribution of votes by party. It was a little bit more enthusiasm for Trump in Republican-leaning counties and a little less enthusiasm for Clinton in Democratic-leaning counties in a few critical states that determined this election.
Sure, the Democrats should widen their message to include the White, formerly industrial workers. Biden put it well in saying that the Democrats should not abandon the White, non-college educated. But, the Democratic coalition that exists is going to stronger and stronger each election cycle. In four years, the White, non-college educated population will represent about 2-3% less of the total electorate. Yes, the Republicans won this time. But, their strategy is not a good one for the long term.
1
The Republicans have probably permanently wrecked Demoratic prospects to recruit good candidates to its can't fight its way out of a wet paper bag cause.
More divide and conquer text from the opinion makers who no longer make opinion. The white, black and brown working class voted against the globalists who are utterly oblivious to the realities faced by working people in America today.
Access to healthcare means nothing if you don't have the job that allows you to pay for it. What matters to these people are jobs that afford a decent standard of living - not jobs that afford one a slow descent into a comfortable poverty. Krugman has advocated for free trade theories that did not work in practice. For years we have had nominees who simply did not speak about the economic circumstances of working people. This year we had two candidates, Bernie Sanders and Donald Trump, who dared to speak about both and you see the result.
Democracy worked. The people spoke and they turned thumbs down to the academic economists and their patrons, the .01 percenters.
Krugman can in no way argue that the trade liberalizations of the Bill Clinton era have benefitted the working class more than they've lost. It's taken us sixteen additional years for the people to understand this - but understand it they did, and all the other red herring issues faded before this truth.
Access to healthcare means nothing if you don't have the job that allows you to pay for it. What matters to these people are jobs that afford a decent standard of living - not jobs that afford one a slow descent into a comfortable poverty. Krugman has advocated for free trade theories that did not work in practice. For years we have had nominees who simply did not speak about the economic circumstances of working people. This year we had two candidates, Bernie Sanders and Donald Trump, who dared to speak about both and you see the result.
Democracy worked. The people spoke and they turned thumbs down to the academic economists and their patrons, the .01 percenters.
Krugman can in no way argue that the trade liberalizations of the Bill Clinton era have benefitted the working class more than they've lost. It's taken us sixteen additional years for the people to understand this - but understand it they did, and all the other red herring issues faded before this truth.
4
The factual analysis is good. The jibes at Sanders are ridiculous. The overall message would seem to be this: Krugman doesn't understand why white working-class voters vote against their interests. Neither do I, but that's not the point. What we learned in this election is not only that identity politics doesn't work with a dwindling white majority, it doesn't even work with the identities of the specific groups it was meant to appeal to. When Sanders criticizes identity politics as a strategy, he doesn't mean that we should ignore or neglect the interests of the different identities that make up the electorate in this country. He means that we need to focus on concrete policy changes that can produce positive effects for everyone in this country. I agree that we won't win over the majority of the white working-class as long as it is divided by race and gender bias. But not every white person who voted for Trump is a racist or a sexist. We can win over some of them and we can motivate other voting groups--like African-Americans, Hispanics, and women--to come out for us in greater numbers. The point is this: does the political elite appeal to identities in a somewhat paternalistic matter? Or do we focus on transformative political proposals they can change the direction in which this country is headed? Krugman is a gradualist, but Sanders proved that you can gain some ground by putting slightly more radical proposals on the agenda.
3
That Krugman opens with popular vote total shows that even a few weeks out, he's not getting it on many levels. Claiming a popular vote victory is like a tennis player losing a match 6-0, 6-0, 6-7, 6-7, 6-7, and then claiming victory for winning more games. As for his perplexing attitude about why rural whites seem to vote against their economic interest, he misses a key point: for those who are religious, there are many things far more important than money. Jews too vote against their economic self-interest, because there are larger principles involves. Ditto for these rural voters, but in a different way.
7
What is it with all the smug elitism here? Your condescension comes through loud and clear in this comment section. The DNC is not even as "progressive" as the Republicans were back in the 60's. The U.S. is not a "center-right" nation. Incrementalism does not work. You just have to speak to people as people, not down at them as if you are doing all these great things for them, and why don't they get it. The election was a measure of the desperation that exists. Identity politics just silos everyone up into "special interests". The demands for gender equality, the end to systemic racism in all its forms, the reduction of inequity in our economy aren't the special demands of women, blacks, the working class. Those are the demands of the 99% as a whole. But to do that will put you in opposition to the "masters of the universe" on Wall Street and in Washington. Democrats have to decide which side they are on.
5
Let's try opening our eye's! For the last few years the headlines have been peppered with supposed 'police homicidal intent against black men' even though 'the signature event' of a gentle giant murdered by a racist cop in Ferguson Mo., turned out to be a fiction 'our media's afraid to admit' and some studies refute this conclusion. Meanwhile in places like Chicage, Baltimore, St. Louis and other cities where cops are demoralized, we see a parade of innocent victims suffer the consequences. Does anyone honestly believe that this situation has no effect on people who hold personal interests over any collective opinion about concepts of justice and public order?
2
"Had the FBI not intervened Trump would (...) forever be cemented as the cartoon character he is. That is the lesson we should internalize and act on,"
writes reader Stephen from Easton, PA.
Agreed with the caveat that we do not know how much of the election outcome is due to election fraud and to which extent these fraudulent distortions would have been stepped up, had the FBI letter turned out to be impossible to cook, its director impervious to the pressure to step in.
We do not even know in which direction there were more successful fraud efforts.
We do know a media that neither reports nor feels a need to investigate the fact that Jill Stein's reported votes were hundreds of percentage points off of all her polling numbers, is dysfunctional at best.
Are you aware independent statistics wonk Richard Charnin predicted a Trump victory with a 98% probability even before the FBI letter could strike and materialize in the polling figures?
One way to internalize this lesson and act upon it, is to never again go with a candidate that can be assessed to be vulnerable to exactly this type of sniper attacks by an adversary camp that can be observed to be intent on those from a miles distance.
It was a suicide choice as readers have been yelling to the NYT writers all along, as they bravely but cluelessly dragged on with self-attached blinders against all odds of reason, trying to drag through a heavily impopular candidate, like bitter clingers, to a bitter finish line.
writes reader Stephen from Easton, PA.
Agreed with the caveat that we do not know how much of the election outcome is due to election fraud and to which extent these fraudulent distortions would have been stepped up, had the FBI letter turned out to be impossible to cook, its director impervious to the pressure to step in.
We do not even know in which direction there were more successful fraud efforts.
We do know a media that neither reports nor feels a need to investigate the fact that Jill Stein's reported votes were hundreds of percentage points off of all her polling numbers, is dysfunctional at best.
Are you aware independent statistics wonk Richard Charnin predicted a Trump victory with a 98% probability even before the FBI letter could strike and materialize in the polling figures?
One way to internalize this lesson and act upon it, is to never again go with a candidate that can be assessed to be vulnerable to exactly this type of sniper attacks by an adversary camp that can be observed to be intent on those from a miles distance.
It was a suicide choice as readers have been yelling to the NYT writers all along, as they bravely but cluelessly dragged on with self-attached blinders against all odds of reason, trying to drag through a heavily impopular candidate, like bitter clingers, to a bitter finish line.
There are only so many players, as their contradictions come to the surface, things become more clear too.
There is only so much the Dems can do; they have to get out a better message, and it has to be media savvy, and calculated. That is the grassroots of the 21st century.
On another note, at a very general level isn't bring jobs back to America essentially a Socialist/Communist idea? The messages put out there by Dems will need to tap into broader economic philosophies, like Communism, Capitalism, and er... Fascism. Back in the 70's and 80's it seemed these words were part of the national lexicon, which in someway has caused a vacuum of confusion for working people today.
There is only so much the Dems can do; they have to get out a better message, and it has to be media savvy, and calculated. That is the grassroots of the 21st century.
On another note, at a very general level isn't bring jobs back to America essentially a Socialist/Communist idea? The messages put out there by Dems will need to tap into broader economic philosophies, like Communism, Capitalism, and er... Fascism. Back in the 70's and 80's it seemed these words were part of the national lexicon, which in someway has caused a vacuum of confusion for working people today.
The American people are inundated by marketers. We even pay to listen to their pitches on TV, at the movie theater or on the internet among others.The best salesman are preachers to whom we hand over millions just for a seat on Sunday morning and to hear a sales pitch that stirs up our spirit. Finally, another master salesman runs for President and succeeds because he stirs up resentment and promises wealth to the underclass . He used exaggerations and promised nirvana in language that those who feel inferior and/or insecure can understand. Have we become a people who are immune to reason, to lazy to thinks about policy, and unable or unwilling to distinguish propaganda from truths and act primarily from our emotion? How many times did you " Hiliary just doesn't excite me when she speaks."
1
It is impossible to imagine the holocaust, but it happened and this part of human beings is frightening. Trump was able to tap into this dark force and use it to gain power and now, position. It remains to be seen if he can continue to control his flock with the Hitler tactics he has employed throughout his campaign I wouldn't be surprised if he doesn't continue to have rallies with large gatherings of his true believers. All of you pundits contend this was and unprecedented election year, I fear the word unprecedented will not do just to what is to come. They need an enemy, who will it be?
1
Perplexed (bothered and bewildered) with distant childhood memories of a Doris Day song evoked from a different world. A simpler, a happier world, it was then, so long ago when the world appeared to be still young , innocent—or at least it seemed so then. T’was a time recalled in old Frank Capra films, and there was, always, Marilyn Monroe or Judy the Magnificent and the Princess Theatre in Pocatello, Idaho, when everything seemed peaceful and serene and manageable even to those who asked little out of life beyond just living it. Sans anguish, sans ugliness, and, especially, sans terror!
How everything has changed and hardly for the better! Of course, back then, it was also the era of Cold War and that famous senator from Wisconsin who dabbled in politics but whose name now escapes me, the era of Checkers and Dr. Strangelove and things hidden in flowerpots. Yet, somehow there was some real faith in the future—all gone now, it would seem, as if it all happened a thousand years ago, at worst, a memory from the pit. In our time, post 9/11 time, beyond absurdity itself, we are perplexed, but there appears to be a total hopelessness and a pain that cannot be mollified. There is nothing one can hold onto now for all certainty is eclipsed and the very foundations of our thoughts shaken. There are no gods out there to assuage the pain anymore.
How everything has changed and hardly for the better! Of course, back then, it was also the era of Cold War and that famous senator from Wisconsin who dabbled in politics but whose name now escapes me, the era of Checkers and Dr. Strangelove and things hidden in flowerpots. Yet, somehow there was some real faith in the future—all gone now, it would seem, as if it all happened a thousand years ago, at worst, a memory from the pit. In our time, post 9/11 time, beyond absurdity itself, we are perplexed, but there appears to be a total hopelessness and a pain that cannot be mollified. There is nothing one can hold onto now for all certainty is eclipsed and the very foundations of our thoughts shaken. There are no gods out there to assuage the pain anymore.
3
Something you've got Mr. Krugman, it is simply a job. Preferably one that pays well enough to support one's self and small family. A job that can pay the bills, put food on the table, a roof over one's head, a car that runs, clothes and medical insurance. College education for the kids and an occasional vacation would be nice. As it is less and less people have these simple things. It is called survival. Today's working class barely makes ends meet.
What's wrong with this picture? The 1-10% have to learn how to share.
What's wrong with this picture? The 1-10% have to learn how to share.
3
People want a story to tell themselves about why they are good and important and are better than other people, or at least as good. It does not matter if the story is factually correct so long as they believe in their hearts it is true.
The actual solution is impossible because the white working class has lost relative ground to minorities, and relative ground is a zero s game. So unless the Democrats want to put "those people" back in their place, the can't win them back. The story about how government is giving "those people" an unfair leg up through trade and welfare and affirmative action is salve to a circumstance that in their hearts they know is not really going to change.
The actual solution is impossible because the white working class has lost relative ground to minorities, and relative ground is a zero s game. So unless the Democrats want to put "those people" back in their place, the can't win them back. The story about how government is giving "those people" an unfair leg up through trade and welfare and affirmative action is salve to a circumstance that in their hearts they know is not really going to change.
1
- Reagan was elected and killed the unions.
- Bush No. 1 was elected and didn't know the price of milk.
- Clinton No. 2 was elected and signed NAFTA, against the advice of remaining unions and against advice of Ross Perot ("that giant sucking sound you hear is the sound of jobs disappearing"). Wall Street was deregulated.
- Bush No. 2 was elected. Wall Street deregulation crashed the economy.
- Obama was elected to fix everything. Main Street bailed out Wall Street. Wall Street then took huge bonuses while bankers were never prosecuted for serious crimes (fines don't count). The jobless were told to get with the reality of globalization.
So Bushes and Clintons were correctly perceived as causing huge problems. There are no names more toxic than the names of Clinton and Bush, in the eyes of the electorate. (Obama was perceived as not really fixing the right problems.)
Then in 2016, the two main parties offered this choice to Main Street:
Bush No. 3 and Clinton No. 2.
Brilliant ideas, right? I mean, the cluelessness is just astounding.
- Bush No. 1 was elected and didn't know the price of milk.
- Clinton No. 2 was elected and signed NAFTA, against the advice of remaining unions and against advice of Ross Perot ("that giant sucking sound you hear is the sound of jobs disappearing"). Wall Street was deregulated.
- Bush No. 2 was elected. Wall Street deregulation crashed the economy.
- Obama was elected to fix everything. Main Street bailed out Wall Street. Wall Street then took huge bonuses while bankers were never prosecuted for serious crimes (fines don't count). The jobless were told to get with the reality of globalization.
So Bushes and Clintons were correctly perceived as causing huge problems. There are no names more toxic than the names of Clinton and Bush, in the eyes of the electorate. (Obama was perceived as not really fixing the right problems.)
Then in 2016, the two main parties offered this choice to Main Street:
Bush No. 3 and Clinton No. 2.
Brilliant ideas, right? I mean, the cluelessness is just astounding.
7
I live in Trump country and work in Clinton Country. I grew up working class blue collar and teach in Hillary country. There is a mutual lack of respect verging on contempt. My blue collar neighbors know full well who Trump is and vote for him because he is "not politically correct". My liberal colleagues figure the working class are idiots and racists, and the media overstates the role the working class played in electing trump. Eliminating identity politics is a necessary but not sufficient condition. Educating the electorate is also necessary. We can't all emigrate to New Zealand
2
Members of the white working class are tempted to blame others for their lot in life. During hard times this urge can galvanize as hatred for people in some group other than theirs. In the 1920s, for example, there was a severe depression in Germany, thanks largely to severe reparations imposed by the victors of World War I. The most frightening aspect of putting Donald Trump in the White House is his campaign's uncanny resemblance to the one waged by Adolph Hitler.
2
I would suggest that most readers of The New York Times and particularly the subset that faithfully read Krugman have little or no knowledge of the people in Clay County and all of the people of the Southern Highlands and their kin that migrated to the industrial North and the the contiguous states to their west.
For starters read a Hillbilly Legacy but more valuable David Fischers Albions Seed.
There are very different from you and applying the rational standards that you think you live and vote by do not apply to these people.
I lived just a bit north of them growing up and even then I realized that they had many admirable qualities of intense devotion to family and place that they also were prone to violence to solve most problems they faced and often they could be divided into those who chose Jesus over whiskey.
They are xenophobic and distrust millionares and Socialists with equoual vigor.
A part of me loves them but my rational brain ses their self distructive ways.
For starters read a Hillbilly Legacy but more valuable David Fischers Albions Seed.
There are very different from you and applying the rational standards that you think you live and vote by do not apply to these people.
I lived just a bit north of them growing up and even then I realized that they had many admirable qualities of intense devotion to family and place that they also were prone to violence to solve most problems they faced and often they could be divided into those who chose Jesus over whiskey.
They are xenophobic and distrust millionares and Socialists with equoual vigor.
A part of me loves them but my rational brain ses their self distructive ways.
2
You could also watch an episode or two of Duck Dynasty to gain a little perspective of the culture. I live in WV and people here love and relate to that show like grandma watching Jerry Fallwell on a Sunday morning.
1
I think Hilary Clinton lost because she suffered from being tarnished for so many years of right wing hatred and simply for being around so long. Hilary was perceived as business as usual in a country desperate for something new. There was also a perception of arrogance that many people felt by her seemingly being anointed by the democratic establishment and liberal elites as the rightful heir to the presidency. Both you, Tom Friedman and other NYT writers were guilty of this. The signs were there. Bernie Sanders, without corporate money, was able to excite millions of people. His message got through the media cacophony of noise by very simply pointing out how the system was rigged and how we needed to help the middle class take back their country. His message, as was Trump’s, could be communicated on a bumper sticker. Instead of embracing Bernie, as the democrats real hope in this election, or even embracing his ideas,(they were in the platform but I didn’t hear Hillary once say that I feel your pain--something Bill Clinton instinctively understood.) Hilary’s slogan was a milk toast meaningless “Stronger Together”. Not everyone wants to be stronger together or even have to talk to our relatives at Thanksgiving. Most of the middle class would have been far better off with democrats in power but its perception versus reality and unless democrats learn how to communicate in a 140 character world (myself included), we will forever be scratching our heads about what went wrong.
2
Cultural issues also played an extraordinary role in Trump's success--gay marriage, transgender access to bathrooms, etc. I am a strong proponent of both issues, but as soon as bathrooms entered the political narrative, I could see votes peeling away. Bathrooms have always been political dynamite--Phyllis Schlafly used them to great success in her campaign against the ERA back in the 1970s.
2
The white working class has been voting Republican for 36 years. In that time, thanks to tax cuts, the top 5% has doubled its ownership of the country, and now owns 75% of it. The poorest 80% of the country owns, collectively, less than 8% of it. Where do we go from here? For conservatives, now that 'rugged individualism' has been morally tapped out, there's only one thing left: outright racism. Trump followed the same path to victory as Mussolini and Hitler, and will leave the country in a similar state. His followers don't expect him to build a wall. They do expect him to keep blaming anyone but themselves for the sorry economic state they find themselves in.
5
What do they want? A better candidate than Hillary Clinton, a woman who is seen as highly compromised. As others have mentioned, she is deeply disliked and not primarily, I think, because she's a woman. She should not have been the Democratic nominee.
Good paying jobs, enough based locally so they can live decently in their home towns and raise children. Maybe Trump can't fix their problems, but at least he said he'll try to do something about trade and immigration and policies they believe hurt small businesses.
They want real respect for who they are and where they come from. An end to social engineering and rapid social change they haven't been given much input on. I think people on the coasts underestimate the impact of things like the President's letter to schools on transgender bathrooms and locker rooms and his executive order regarding illegal immigrants. Protests by college students and Black Lives Matter against the police undoubtedly had a very negative impact at the ballot box. Certainly, the gay marriage decision did. The constant drumbeat by national media regarding these issues drove many to vote for Trump. They feel it has been crammed down their throats. The people I know who voted for Trump explicitly told me thinks have gone too far to the left and they want a return to the middle. Trump is seen as more apt to protect their interests regarding religion and social issues.
Good paying jobs, enough based locally so they can live decently in their home towns and raise children. Maybe Trump can't fix their problems, but at least he said he'll try to do something about trade and immigration and policies they believe hurt small businesses.
They want real respect for who they are and where they come from. An end to social engineering and rapid social change they haven't been given much input on. I think people on the coasts underestimate the impact of things like the President's letter to schools on transgender bathrooms and locker rooms and his executive order regarding illegal immigrants. Protests by college students and Black Lives Matter against the police undoubtedly had a very negative impact at the ballot box. Certainly, the gay marriage decision did. The constant drumbeat by national media regarding these issues drove many to vote for Trump. They feel it has been crammed down their throats. The people I know who voted for Trump explicitly told me thinks have gone too far to the left and they want a return to the middle. Trump is seen as more apt to protect their interests regarding religion and social issues.
4
It is also possible that unemployed blue collar voters are not motivated to learn newer skills but expect that their lives be sheltered from globally imposed changes which makes their skills obsolete. Hillary was criticized by the press for being a policy wonk - even by well informed columnists who publish here - she was not inspirational!!! - well Trump was - with lies.
3
It's really simple professor. The Democratic party has to go back to its roots. Since the 30s it has been the party of the working and middle class. What is it now? The party of the big donors and wishy-washy Clintonism.
Trump simply filled the void that Democrats left by abandoning their natural base. Maybe they don't vote against their own economic interests but because they've got nothing to lose anymore.
Trump simply filled the void that Democrats left by abandoning their natural base. Maybe they don't vote against their own economic interests but because they've got nothing to lose anymore.
6
I've grown disenchanted with Dr. Krugman recently as he's excused Obama's mistakes, including the doomed-to-fail non-health care reform scheme and misdirection of TARP dollars to big banks rather than the people they victimized and infrastructure spending, whined about the outcome of the election and given HRC and establishment Democrats a pass even though they ran an abysmal campaign.
He was right today, however, when he wrote that he didn't understand the resentment of white voters.
No kidding. Maybe if you and other academics and pundits who regularly lambaste the white working class left the coasts and lived among the people who swung the election for awhile you'd gain some insight about the resentment you can't understand.
I can tell you this: it's not fueled by the causes you sited. It's driven by decades of disappointment over the Democrat's refusal to address the concerns of blue-collar families who supported the Party election after election. It's fueled by the after-effects of NAFTA, which the Clintons passed while passing out assurances that it wouldn't eviscerate Rust Belt economies, the persistent failure to deliver on promised labor law reform, the fear of tens of thousands of Teamsters who faced deep cuts in their pensions as a result of proposal backed by Obama, and numerous other damaging slights.
As a liberal who counts those you disparage as friends the only thing I don't understand is why it took them so long to express their anger at the ballot box.
He was right today, however, when he wrote that he didn't understand the resentment of white voters.
No kidding. Maybe if you and other academics and pundits who regularly lambaste the white working class left the coasts and lived among the people who swung the election for awhile you'd gain some insight about the resentment you can't understand.
I can tell you this: it's not fueled by the causes you sited. It's driven by decades of disappointment over the Democrat's refusal to address the concerns of blue-collar families who supported the Party election after election. It's fueled by the after-effects of NAFTA, which the Clintons passed while passing out assurances that it wouldn't eviscerate Rust Belt economies, the persistent failure to deliver on promised labor law reform, the fear of tens of thousands of Teamsters who faced deep cuts in their pensions as a result of proposal backed by Obama, and numerous other damaging slights.
As a liberal who counts those you disparage as friends the only thing I don't understand is why it took them so long to express their anger at the ballot box.
7
I agree with much of what you have written Dr. Krugman, however you left out one vital piece of information - the fact that conservative media spewing half truths and propaganda if not out right lies 24/7 exists in the areas that voted for Trump. There was no liberal/progressive media to counter the one way flow of this so-called "information". The Democrats and liberals have failed to provide a compelling counter-narrative to this barrage of misinformation. It amounts to a psy-ops campaign that has been going on for the past 30+ years. The Democrats and the liberals who contribute to their campaigns have never taken seriously the fact that they need to fund long term (50-100 years) strategies and liberal media outlets and pundits. In the past 15 years the few progressive radio talk show hosts that exist have been frozen out of market after market with so called format changes. MSNBC which really never sought or wanted the liberal mantel has aggressively gotten rid of those who are left of center. So there is by in large no liberal counter message to the conservative onslaught. Until our side takes this seriously we are always doomed to fail in the red parts of our country.
1
The now classic Paul Krugman column: an admitted, and insufferable, lack of understanding of his own position as a "liberal elite" who simply has no idea how white working class people live in America anymore. He and Charles Blow produced devastating and ignorant hit pieces on Bernie Sanders during the Democratic Primary - Donald Trump never had better allies - and, in effect, destroyed the real connection Sanders, and the Democratic Party, had with white working class voters, not to mention millions of young and Independent voters who resonated with his populist message. Clinton never gained those supporters. Sanders, according to Krugman and Blow, was "pie in the sky," but somehow Trump, with no pie or sky, won over the far more "pragmatic" Ms. Clinton, who never campaigned a single day in Wisconsin and only once in Michigan. The fact that Krugman STILL does not get this is beyond belief. The white working class do want jobs and insurance, but also recognition of their traditional values. But they would have voted for Sanders, who would not have lost every Rust Belt state, and who offered a true voice - and champion - for many of their concerns, if not all of their values. The dark side of that - and the only alternative left to them - was Trump. The "liberal media elite" scoffed at these voters - and the only Democratic candidate who gave them voice. They cling to ignorance even now. Their lack of understanding of how actual people live in this country is an obscenity.
8
What do you mean by "traditional values?" I usually take those to mean "an honest days work deserves a honest days wage" and going to church on Sundays. Is that what you mean?
In times of stress, people are always open to demagoguery, to generalities that feed on anger with broad brush strokes and little substance. At the risk of seeming heretical, there was a streak of that in our own American Revolution.
The colonies already had a substantial degree of self-rule, poverty as we understand it did exist but wasn't nearly as widespread as it is today, and general popular attitude was forward-looking and optimistic. The sector of colonial society most affected by British excesses was the merchant class, and in the end, it was that class which used demagogic tactics to foment revolution. Being one of the richest merchants (and smugglers) in the colonies, it's no wonder that John Hancock so boldly slashed his name on the Declaration of Independence.
After it was all over, there was little change in the daily lives of the vast majority of citizens: now Americans instead of colonials. Will the Trump "revolution" be any different? Unlikely. The stakes may seem different - the specifics of jobs (liberally salted with the vagueness of "greatness") versus the generality of freedoms most colonials already possessed for the most part - but the broad outcome of significant change in the daily lives of the citizenry is very likely to be a chimera.
The first Revolution turned out well. But this one? Most likely a pothole in the path the country is already on, for better or worse.
The colonies already had a substantial degree of self-rule, poverty as we understand it did exist but wasn't nearly as widespread as it is today, and general popular attitude was forward-looking and optimistic. The sector of colonial society most affected by British excesses was the merchant class, and in the end, it was that class which used demagogic tactics to foment revolution. Being one of the richest merchants (and smugglers) in the colonies, it's no wonder that John Hancock so boldly slashed his name on the Declaration of Independence.
After it was all over, there was little change in the daily lives of the vast majority of citizens: now Americans instead of colonials. Will the Trump "revolution" be any different? Unlikely. The stakes may seem different - the specifics of jobs (liberally salted with the vagueness of "greatness") versus the generality of freedoms most colonials already possessed for the most part - but the broad outcome of significant change in the daily lives of the citizenry is very likely to be a chimera.
The first Revolution turned out well. But this one? Most likely a pothole in the path the country is already on, for better or worse.
2
Republicans have known for years that people consistently vote against their own interests for hate, racism, revenge and jealousy if what people who have invested in themselves and gain from that investment. These people do not know what a fascist is or how they work, the do not care about a kelptocracy, they are the mob and mob rule is short lived and always ends in a police state. George Orewell laid it all out, fake news will be our newspeak and policies will be double-think and will be in constant flux.
Two million more people voted for Clinton and because of an obsolute provision of law Trump claims a mandate for a coup d’etat to go in one step from constitutional democracy to an authoritarian kleptocracy. The Electoral College should there be sufficient patriots could put a stop to this but if they did there would be instant civil war with the police siding with Trump who lost the popular vote and would also have lost in the Electoral College, which saddly enough if Trump had lost the election outright on election night. So it would be Trump one way or another because only a Republican can be a ligitimate president in what will soon be a one party nation.
Two million more people voted for Clinton and because of an obsolute provision of law Trump claims a mandate for a coup d’etat to go in one step from constitutional democracy to an authoritarian kleptocracy. The Electoral College should there be sufficient patriots could put a stop to this but if they did there would be instant civil war with the police siding with Trump who lost the popular vote and would also have lost in the Electoral College, which saddly enough if Trump had lost the election outright on election night. So it would be Trump one way or another because only a Republican can be a ligitimate president in what will soon be a one party nation.
Paul - How about all those African-Americans voting 90% + for the Democrats for 40 years..what have they gotten out of the deal? Why are all those African Americans, most without college degrees, voting against their interests?
You are a liberal ideologue who seems incapable of grasping that others might have opinions different than you do. That's why Hillary was beaten. She received overwhelming majorities in NY, CA, IL, and MA and fared poorly elsewhere. Maybe you should get in your limo and go for a ride outside the NY metro area. You might meet some deplorables who earn livings, go to church, don't hate anyone, and are tired of being looked down by Eastern elites who think if you didn't go to the right school you are stupid. Enjoy the next four years....
You are a liberal ideologue who seems incapable of grasping that others might have opinions different than you do. That's why Hillary was beaten. She received overwhelming majorities in NY, CA, IL, and MA and fared poorly elsewhere. Maybe you should get in your limo and go for a ride outside the NY metro area. You might meet some deplorables who earn livings, go to church, don't hate anyone, and are tired of being looked down by Eastern elites who think if you didn't go to the right school you are stupid. Enjoy the next four years....
5
How best to understand the resentment? In high school I was one of the pointy-headed, pencil-necked geeks (the point-headed part wasn't actually true), and that was made abundantly clear by a certain group of my classmates. Implied was that I thought I was better than them (which, in my pencil-necked insecurity, was decidedly untrue, but irrelevant). What was true, which I realized only in retrospect, was that in the school curriculum of science, math and social studies, with the occasional shop and art class, I was better than them. And this was institutionalized and projected: what was truly valued was implicit in that curriculum. You could bridge that gap if you were a jock (with the outsized importance of athletics), but otherwise you were out of luck. In the parallel universe curriculum of shop, art, music and the occasional science class I would have been on the outside looking in. Did I, as an individual, deserve ridicule because I studied hard? Of course not. But, can I understand being resented? Of course I can. And I also realize that this distinction did not end with high school graduation.
3
Oh, I get it you are an effete "progressive".
3
Democrats have to figure out why the white working class just voted overwhelmingly against its own economic interests - In A Different Mirror, Ronald Takaki offers a perspective worth repeating in this venue. Poor Whites and African slaves plotted a class insurrection against the White landowners to overthrow the class system. In order to quell the insurrection, White landowners created a racial hierarchy to mask the class hierarchy so that poor Whites would never align with African slaves. Poor Whites bought into the racial hierarchy of their assumed "superiority" over Blacks and never questioned the class hierarchy even though they were not much better off than slaves. This tactic is evident by the fact that Trump ran an explicitly White campaign and was awarded with their votes.
Red state Whites may never vote in their economic interest because it would require them to think about history and reality, which are not provided by their sole news source - Fox News. The cycle that began over three hundred years ago continues.
Red state Whites may never vote in their economic interest because it would require them to think about history and reality, which are not provided by their sole news source - Fox News. The cycle that began over three hundred years ago continues.
4
Vast swathes of the country, area wise, are suffering. In those areas the vast majority of the population are white Christians and they all vote for Republican governors and state legislatures. The areas where the country thrives are multicultural, multiethnic, multiracial, multi-religious, and vote for Democrats. Why should I not look down dismissively on people who constantly vote for a party and policies that always fail them? Unfortunately we live in a country where the power of the Senate and the election of the President is heavily skewed away from the concept of one person one vote, and towards low population states. This power will only grow stronger as the educated and industrious people from those areas move to the thriving urban areas. Also unfortunately, the flow of tax dollars follows this same pattern from thriving Democratic areas to the failing Republican areas.
Something tells me though that even if the Democrats started running candidates who claimed they were Young Earth Creationists, wanted to outlaw abortions and birth control, and carried assault rifles with them wherever they went, the identity of belonging to the Rebublican party is far greater than anything the Democrats have to offer.
Something tells me though that even if the Democrats started running candidates who claimed they were Young Earth Creationists, wanted to outlaw abortions and birth control, and carried assault rifles with them wherever they went, the identity of belonging to the Rebublican party is far greater than anything the Democrats have to offer.
2
We have morphed from a country that is of, by, and for "We the People", to a country of "rugged individualists" where we look out only for ourselves and fight for survival with each other.
Ronald Reagan convinced us that a government of, by, and working for our common good, was actually the problem.
Now we have a government of the rich that is only after more money for themselves.
"Corporations are people, my friends !"
Ronald Reagan convinced us that a government of, by, and working for our common good, was actually the problem.
Now we have a government of the rich that is only after more money for themselves.
"Corporations are people, my friends !"
5
"Maybe a Trump administration can keep its supporters on board, not by improving their lives, but by feeding their sense of resentment."
More likely, feeding their fear. Recall that belligerence was the bedrock of the Trump campaign and its most vociferous supporters. So when the promised jobs fail to materialize and entitlements like ACA are walked back, expect to see the inevitable anger channeled against an inflated external threat. Future historians will be kept busy analyzing the Trump Presidency's unimaginably devastating Iran War.
More likely, feeding their fear. Recall that belligerence was the bedrock of the Trump campaign and its most vociferous supporters. So when the promised jobs fail to materialize and entitlements like ACA are walked back, expect to see the inevitable anger channeled against an inflated external threat. Future historians will be kept busy analyzing the Trump Presidency's unimaginably devastating Iran War.
2
There is also the religious bigotry. White evangelicals make up 26% of the electorate and voted 81% for Trump. Everyone else voted 60%/35% for Clinton. I've heard people claim that the most important issue in this campaign was "religious freedom". That's religious freedom as in Pence's Religious Freedom Restoration Act, which allowed businesses to discriminate against LGBT people.
7
Many of these folks were preached to that it was the "last chance" to stop abortion, they repeated Trump's lies about killing full grown babies, they feel hating their own gay kids is OK in 2016 America.
Realization of the con will hit soon.
Realization of the con will hit soon.
1
Paul - why not try ignorance and stupidity, especially as these same voters have been turning to Republicans for decades. It seems to me that resentment is just easier than education. At least with education, these people could(theoretically) help themselves (a self-help kind of strategy), but they just prefer resentment because it is easier.
3
"Donald Trump in striking distance was overwhelming support from whites without college degrees. So what can Democrats do to win back at least some of those voters?"
Answer: Passively create an environment where education becomes the highest value; aggressively institute policies that promote education through a college degree or revitalized education through high school so that it is adequate for the 21st century. In particular education that address civics and economics.
As for the attitudes of 'white working class" and their "resentment" and displays of anger, etc. maybe it is time for attitude adjustment, counseling and public projects that explore the pyschology of anger and propose various non-governmental solutions.
Answer: Passively create an environment where education becomes the highest value; aggressively institute policies that promote education through a college degree or revitalized education through high school so that it is adequate for the 21st century. In particular education that address civics and economics.
As for the attitudes of 'white working class" and their "resentment" and displays of anger, etc. maybe it is time for attitude adjustment, counseling and public projects that explore the pyschology of anger and propose various non-governmental solutions.
Unfortunately, the body of this article clearly contradicts its conclusion paragraph. The dems already have pretty good policies. What they need is just a bit of populist _rhetoric_ or more precisely, a way to connect on a _visceral_ level with voters, especially but not exclusively less-educated whites. Because feelings, not facts, is what drives voters. It is so strange that the 40-year wife, companion and partner of Bill Clinton, a world champion connector, should fail so badly at this.
3
Look no further for our economic demise than the opening of China by Nixon, a Republican, and the appointment of Leonard Woodcock as our first Ambassador to China by Carter, both Democrats. The irony of Woodcock, our premier labor leader being the Ambassador is incredible. Under his leadership innumerable American companies began their trek to China for joint ventures to escape American unions, government environmental regulations among others, and grossly lower labor costs. Some loyalty to the American workers and their families who meekly began to buy the "Made in China" labeled products with out a thought as to what these cheaper products had in store for them. Coal jobs are not the fault of these movements offshore but we have dismantled much of our manufacturing to China and other low labor markets and you can put the blame on this rapid loss to the hate of unions and total disregard of the mass of Americans by our elites.
6
Simplifying, the only real questions are: generally, why do we only hear what we want to hear, and, specifically, why are economically illiterates so sure that economists are lying, whilst someone else is saying what they want to hear? Certainty varies directly with ignorance.
2
This is the single most important and perplexing issue of politics of our time. It's multifaceted: the belief that the strong white guys are always right; that minorities need to be put back in their place; that corporate tax breaks are deserved because those people "made it" so why shouldn't they be rewarded (and maybe someday I'll make it too); that any policy to help "me", like health insurance, is really a veiled attempt to give away to moochers who are "stealing my money" (a real quote from a family member who voted for Trumpolini). Whoever figures this out deserves a Nobel Prize. Mr. Krugman, care to leave the bubble to provide answers instead of questions? And maybe add to your awards collection?
3
There is still a substantial portion of the population who are self dependent, who have dignity, and do not wish to depend on the government for their sustenance. obama tried to change the country, through expanded food stamp programs and obama healthcare , to make the majority of the country dependent upon the government and the largess of the Democratic party for their sustenance. it failed this time because of the character of the American people. however , unfortunately this something for nothing philosophy, entices the millennium generations and likely future generations to come. the economic decline of the US was likely halted this time but a further decline in the economic future of the US is far from guaranteed as new generations of voters are enticed by obama"s siren calls of receiving benefits and doing no work in return.
4
So what you are saying is that human being should not act as our Framers intended, as a society banding together to secure the blessings of life, liberty, and the pursuit of happiness (what we might call self-actualization); to provide for the general defense and the common welfare- no, what we want is everyone on their own and for themselves? The law of the jungle?
1
Where precisely is your documentation for your diatribe? How specifically are the folks in Clay County, KY supposed to pay for healthcare when there are no jobs and the "largess" of the Affordable Care Act is rescinded and nothing is put in its place by the Republicans? Just let 'me die, right? They just need to pull themselves together and find a good paying job, right? Geez.
The difference in perspectives of urban and non-urban citizens is probably more difficult for urban residents to understand, because most of our media are located in and report on urban areas, and most of our TV shows and movies are about urban or suburban areas. The feature of non-urban life that is most often misunderstood or ignored is the sense of attachment that non-urban people feel for their communities. They therefore don't rejoice when Democrats propose more benefits, more entitlements, more disability -- because their focus isn't only on "how it affects me," but also on "how it affects my community." Even if your household is receiving transfer payments, does that compensate for the boarded up storefronts, the lack of a grocery store? We all have a tendency to think that these things are inevitable, especially urbanites, since they tend to think these communities are "deplorable" and "irredeemable" anyway. They tend to think "who would want to live there?" But much of the decline of the heartland has been the result of federal policies that ignored their effect on any people other than the urban core. Some health experts predict that a third of rural hospitals will close within the next two or three years. If cities can spend their resources to subsidize sports arenas, can't the feds find a way to subsidize reasonably accessible health care for non-urban communities? Geography may be the key to solving the problem of income inequality.
3
When Hillary spoke of the half of Trump supporters who are deplorable, she was speaking of the White Nationalists, the misogynists, the bullies and people who make rude fun of others. Her statement in context makes this plain. The real challenge Democrats face is that the tend to speak in complex sentences of complicated matters (and in reality, all matters are complicated) while DJT speaks in the simplistic emotionally charged lingo of the demagogue.
2
It's a complex problem and you can drown in nuance, but this much is clear: Democrats stink at messaging. Kentucky, with its huge nominal Obamacare success, is an excellent example, with Democrats terrified of running on their accomplishments.
As I said after the 2014 midterms: "Kentuckians, God love 'em, don't generally understand that Kynect is but a state exchange under the hated Obamacare. Who's going to tell them? Certainly not Alison Lundergan Grimes, the very Grimes who will not be addressed as 'Senator' any time soon."
http://amorpha.blogspot.com/2014/11/as-lambs-to-slaughter.html
Two years ago, Mitch McConnell deftly and disingenuously danced around Kynect/Obamacare and won reelection.
At least Bernie would have told 'em.
Alas, our electorate doesn't do "policy". We are very poorly informed. (Which bodes ill for democracy.) Trump showed us, however, that spectacle has some utility. Do Democrats counter with the same? I don't know.
As I said after the 2014 midterms: "Kentuckians, God love 'em, don't generally understand that Kynect is but a state exchange under the hated Obamacare. Who's going to tell them? Certainly not Alison Lundergan Grimes, the very Grimes who will not be addressed as 'Senator' any time soon."
http://amorpha.blogspot.com/2014/11/as-lambs-to-slaughter.html
Two years ago, Mitch McConnell deftly and disingenuously danced around Kynect/Obamacare and won reelection.
At least Bernie would have told 'em.
Alas, our electorate doesn't do "policy". We are very poorly informed. (Which bodes ill for democracy.) Trump showed us, however, that spectacle has some utility. Do Democrats counter with the same? I don't know.
3
Paul is beside himself that an old man from Brooklyn/Vermont is going to be the democratic force, going forward.
3
Trump also promised these Americans to keep them safe from Terrorism. Since elected, he has held meeting with foreign Business partners . But he hasn't found time for intelligence briefings.
4
Populism, whether espoused by William Jennings Bryan a century ago, or by Bernie Sanders or Donald Trump today, offers people something for nothing. If only others would pay their "fair share" or if someone could stop the "rigging" of the system to benefit the elites, then all would be well with the country. But populists always promise snake oil. Populist policies never work.
And that's because income inequality hasn't grown and the simple fix of raising the cap on SS to make it work is too unfair to the wealthy?
The Dems need to quit telling me how good the economy is doing.
The vote wasn't for Trump. It was against the Democrats.
I work and my wife works.
We both drive cars with over 200k miles on them.
We haven't been out to dinner in months.
Vacation, what's that?
Our clothes are hand me downs.
The ACA is oxymoronic...really. $20 co-pay to see a Dr. Another $20 co-pay for meds...and God forbid a visit to the ER...oops, I went to the "wrong" ER that wasn't in my system...$400 co-pay.
Its about the economy , Stupid.
The vote wasn't for Trump. It was against the Democrats.
I work and my wife works.
We both drive cars with over 200k miles on them.
We haven't been out to dinner in months.
Vacation, what's that?
Our clothes are hand me downs.
The ACA is oxymoronic...really. $20 co-pay to see a Dr. Another $20 co-pay for meds...and God forbid a visit to the ER...oops, I went to the "wrong" ER that wasn't in my system...$400 co-pay.
Its about the economy , Stupid.
8
And Donald Trump's tax cut for the rich is going to help you guys out?
1
Don't say no one told Paul Krugman about populism.
On Dec. 21 last year I commented: "Let's see: [According to Krugman] Republican voters are rejecting the Republican establishment because they don't care about candidates telling lies because the Republican establishment taught them not to care."
"Oh, and wait for the clincher. The Republican party is a nest of secret Putin-lovers".
"How typical of Krugman to patronize the masses as incapable of having a political thought that they have not been impregnated with by the elites."
"The Trump phenomenon is about something with far deeper roots than W or Sarah Palin. It is about populism. Should I spell that for Krugman?"
"President Obama comes closer to the truth in his comments reported in today's New York Times. The Donald, he said, 'is exploiting the resentment and anxieties of working-class men to boost his campaign.'"
"Populism isn't owned by any one particular party. It's George Wallace and Huey Long. The Trump-Putin mutual admiration society is not new either. FDR called Mussolini 'admirable' and said he was 'deeply impressed by what he has accomplished.' You'll find echoes of the same anti-establishment rhetoric in the Tea Party and the Occupy Wall Street movement."
"Populism takes complicated truths and human fallibility and dumbs them down into conspiracy theories."
On Dec. 21 last year I commented: "Let's see: [According to Krugman] Republican voters are rejecting the Republican establishment because they don't care about candidates telling lies because the Republican establishment taught them not to care."
"Oh, and wait for the clincher. The Republican party is a nest of secret Putin-lovers".
"How typical of Krugman to patronize the masses as incapable of having a political thought that they have not been impregnated with by the elites."
"The Trump phenomenon is about something with far deeper roots than W or Sarah Palin. It is about populism. Should I spell that for Krugman?"
"President Obama comes closer to the truth in his comments reported in today's New York Times. The Donald, he said, 'is exploiting the resentment and anxieties of working-class men to boost his campaign.'"
"Populism isn't owned by any one particular party. It's George Wallace and Huey Long. The Trump-Putin mutual admiration society is not new either. FDR called Mussolini 'admirable' and said he was 'deeply impressed by what he has accomplished.' You'll find echoes of the same anti-establishment rhetoric in the Tea Party and the Occupy Wall Street movement."
"Populism takes complicated truths and human fallibility and dumbs them down into conspiracy theories."
2
Who cares, at this point, why people voted for Trump? They did and now
he is apparently going to be the President. The question now is, What are
we going to DO about it? I haven't got the slightest idea and wonder if anybody else does?
he is apparently going to be the President. The question now is, What are
we going to DO about it? I haven't got the slightest idea and wonder if anybody else does?
4
Dr. Krugman;
You do not understand their resentment?
Do you remember the New Yorker magazine cover depicting the USA as only New York and California? The term "flyover country"? They stick to their "guns and religion"? The emails denigrating Catholics? The New York Times's comments sections that constantly ridicule religion? One can't be constantly ridiculed and not react emotionaly. Emotions drown out rational thinking. As many columnists have written recently, the liberal coastal elite live in a bubble, ignorant of what the middle US thinks.
You do not understand their resentment?
Do you remember the New Yorker magazine cover depicting the USA as only New York and California? The term "flyover country"? They stick to their "guns and religion"? The emails denigrating Catholics? The New York Times's comments sections that constantly ridicule religion? One can't be constantly ridiculed and not react emotionaly. Emotions drown out rational thinking. As many columnists have written recently, the liberal coastal elite live in a bubble, ignorant of what the middle US thinks.
8
I am not sure about all this pointy head analysis. Democrats shot themselves in the foot by appointing a deeply flawed candidate. It was as if the entire democratic establishment felt like it owed to the Clintons to appoint Hillary and they openly rigged the system in her favor. Frankly, Tim Kaine would have made a much better candidate. So, before blaming the white working Americans, Democrats should get their own house in order first; this is what you get when you get carried away by dynasties and brand names.
5
Hillary won the vote by a healthy margin. DJT is right- the system is rigged. We are experiencing detaxation without representation, the effect of which has been to hollow our our country, put us in debt slavery, and cripple the people's government.
When you run a candidate with the second lowest favorability ratings, there's a good chance you lose.
Don't underestimate the power of am radio. The landscapers, masons, contractors I've ridden with to job sites listen to sports radio or talk radio. 20 years of trashing Hillary and Democrats will take its toll. Mix in a distrust of other media sources and no time or interest in actually researching the truth and you end up here.
And it's not limited to blue collar workers either. Real estate agents, insurance agents, lawyers and mortgage bankers also listen. Anyone without satellite radio and who spends a lot of time in their car listens.
Mr Krugman is correct about getting the message out. Republicans play the long game. Investing in think tanks to be "experts" on tv, sponsor radio shows, etc. Now with false stories rampant on social media, they've taken over there too.
Good luck Dems.
Don't underestimate the power of am radio. The landscapers, masons, contractors I've ridden with to job sites listen to sports radio or talk radio. 20 years of trashing Hillary and Democrats will take its toll. Mix in a distrust of other media sources and no time or interest in actually researching the truth and you end up here.
And it's not limited to blue collar workers either. Real estate agents, insurance agents, lawyers and mortgage bankers also listen. Anyone without satellite radio and who spends a lot of time in their car listens.
Mr Krugman is correct about getting the message out. Republicans play the long game. Investing in think tanks to be "experts" on tv, sponsor radio shows, etc. Now with false stories rampant on social media, they've taken over there too.
Good luck Dems.
3
It's actually very simple. You need to speak to, and about, the constituencies that you want to vote for you. After Reagan was elected, the Democratic Party gave up on courting the so-called Reagan Democrats, whereas the Republicans continued to court them. So, even though the Democrats had policies that benefited them and the Republicans didn't, the Republicans got their votes. The same thing happened with Trump. On the stump, Hillary talked about minority rights, women's rights, and gun control. Trump talked about jobs.
3
Prof. Krugman - and I think the world of him - is in denial. What has been going around the Clinton supporters is the notion that the Dems have been the party of the working man all along. But this rings hollow and for good reason:
The ascendancy of George McGovern to the presidential nomination in 1972 wrought major changes to the Democratic Party. It established the idea put forth by his adviser, Fred Dutton, that the Democratic Party was no longer going to base itself on organized labor, but on college-educated professionals. Its emphasis was to shift from bread-and-butter economic issues to individual rights.
This matured during the late 1980s, when Rep. Tony Coelho accelerated the practice of soliciting corporate donors, which was picked up by Bill Clinton and Barack Obama, and lately Hillary Clinton. The result was a Democratic Party dominated by 'gentry liberals.' The gentry liberals constituted a true liberal party in the European-Canadian style, one that was big on individual freedom but also neoliberal economics. Thomas Frank writing for "The Guardian" warned back in late July where this would lead: https://www.theguardian.com/commentisfree/2016/jul/28/hillary-clinton-do... .
The Democratic Party needs to return to the populism of William Jennings Bryan, FDR, Henry Wallace, Harry Truman, and Lyndon Johnson.
The ascendancy of George McGovern to the presidential nomination in 1972 wrought major changes to the Democratic Party. It established the idea put forth by his adviser, Fred Dutton, that the Democratic Party was no longer going to base itself on organized labor, but on college-educated professionals. Its emphasis was to shift from bread-and-butter economic issues to individual rights.
This matured during the late 1980s, when Rep. Tony Coelho accelerated the practice of soliciting corporate donors, which was picked up by Bill Clinton and Barack Obama, and lately Hillary Clinton. The result was a Democratic Party dominated by 'gentry liberals.' The gentry liberals constituted a true liberal party in the European-Canadian style, one that was big on individual freedom but also neoliberal economics. Thomas Frank writing for "The Guardian" warned back in late July where this would lead: https://www.theguardian.com/commentisfree/2016/jul/28/hillary-clinton-do... .
The Democratic Party needs to return to the populism of William Jennings Bryan, FDR, Henry Wallace, Harry Truman, and Lyndon Johnson.
6
Unfortunately when so many of the uneducated workers can barely read above grade level English, all they can understand is their feelings, which is all relative. I'm sure some of Trump's racist voters wouldn't care if Trump didn't bring the jobs back. They would just believe what he says that sound true to their gut feelings.
1
I voted for Hilary, but this piece comes across as the whining of a sore loser who knows better than anyone else what is in the best interest of the working poor. Please.....
7
In my opinion the Clinton problem with the poorest, less educated, predominantly white men was her emphasis on the personalities of the presidential candidates of the two major parties instead of simplified emphasis on the differences in the economic policies of their respective parties. This should have included the differences in positions on fixing the country's transportation system, raising the federal minimum wage, changing the qualifications for receiving overtime and building the support system for changing our energy source in light of the threat of global warming. In all of these questions the Democratic Party was supporting job creating while the Republican Party was publicly opposed.
2
Mr. Krugman misses the mark. History proves "perceived authenticity" wins the White House. Like Kerry, Gore and Dukakis, Hillary's campaign trail persona was blatantly manipulated by handlers. America didn't buy it. After two-years campaigning, most voters are still clueless to Hillary's real personality. Trump has a mountain of unfavorable qualities, but "inauthentic" is not among them.
Everyone knows Trump.
Bernie Sanders certainly has negatives, but the guy is without doubt real. Any Senator who drives a Dodge Dart and combs hair with a balloon can never be accused of being "overly-handled." Whereas Trump is an authentic liar, con man and unethical businessman. Sanders is an authentic dreamer. Given the choice, swing voters would have opted for the dreamer.
But America wasn't offered that choice.
Working-class whites shot themselves in the foot by electing Trump. His tax and trade policies will do nothing for ex-steel, coal and auto workers. Yet if Democrats once again nominate candidates high in experience but low in oratory skills and genuineness, working-class whites (along with many other swing voters) will shoot themselves again and again when voting for who sits in the Oval Office.
Everyone knows Trump.
Bernie Sanders certainly has negatives, but the guy is without doubt real. Any Senator who drives a Dodge Dart and combs hair with a balloon can never be accused of being "overly-handled." Whereas Trump is an authentic liar, con man and unethical businessman. Sanders is an authentic dreamer. Given the choice, swing voters would have opted for the dreamer.
But America wasn't offered that choice.
Working-class whites shot themselves in the foot by electing Trump. His tax and trade policies will do nothing for ex-steel, coal and auto workers. Yet if Democrats once again nominate candidates high in experience but low in oratory skills and genuineness, working-class whites (along with many other swing voters) will shoot themselves again and again when voting for who sits in the Oval Office.
3
Trump has been on every side of every issue.
Therein lies slim hope.
On the minus side, he generally comes down on the side of what is good for Donald, no matter the cost to others.
Therein lies slim hope.
On the minus side, he generally comes down on the side of what is good for Donald, no matter the cost to others.
Again I say, Hillary won, the system and the people lost.
Sadly, you are right. I learned at a very young age that, just like your high school student government, the US Presidency is at heart a popularity contest.
This is a reach. So Krugman proposes to ignore the issues that truly matter and focus on winning with appeals to identity and culture? How very bizarre for someone who has for so long advocated for a more fact, data and issue based debate. As if Hillary Clinton could even have delivered with that strategy. The fact of the matter is that it takes a gifted politician to actually win and lead on the issues, and we found that in Bernie Sanders. Moreover, Bernie Sanders was a better candidate on the identity side: It was a corrupt Democratic Establishment, of which Krugman was shamefully a part for this election, that undermined what was a combined appeal to both identity and economic interest. By quashing real competition in the primary, the Democratic Establishment shot itself in the foot and turned its back on the future. So sad to see that the message has not gotten through to many in Democratic leadership networks, and that they are now openly trying to undermine Keith Ellison's bid for DNC chair. Such a shame that Krugman refuses to admit that Sanders was the real deal: A gifted politician and messenger of a progressive agenda that could actually win on the issues.
7
I have liked Krugman's thoughts on economics for a long, long time, and am in agreement with much of his column. But he has a blind spot when he steps outside economics, and that is best illustrated by his twice using the words "who imagine look down on them" and "imagined liberal disdain".
That disdain is very real. Mr. Krugman, not only by Conservative Elites but also by Liberal Elites. And the vast majority of working and lower-middle class voters know it. They responded to both Sanders and Trump because these two men spoke to them and not at them. They acknowledged their resentment and the legitimacy of their concerns.
I drove along US Route 11 through extreme upstate New York twice this past summer, and the route had about an equal number of Trump and Sanders signs. Nary a Clinton sign anywhere. Hillary would have run a much better campaign had she decided to undertake another "listening tour" before this campaign whether in upstate New York or in the Mid-West. But she had already done that and "knew" what people needed (but not what they resented). Do you suppose a dozen years and many millions of dollars in wealth might have affected that?
On second thought, maybe Mr. Krugman should have joined her!
That disdain is very real. Mr. Krugman, not only by Conservative Elites but also by Liberal Elites. And the vast majority of working and lower-middle class voters know it. They responded to both Sanders and Trump because these two men spoke to them and not at them. They acknowledged their resentment and the legitimacy of their concerns.
I drove along US Route 11 through extreme upstate New York twice this past summer, and the route had about an equal number of Trump and Sanders signs. Nary a Clinton sign anywhere. Hillary would have run a much better campaign had she decided to undertake another "listening tour" before this campaign whether in upstate New York or in the Mid-West. But she had already done that and "knew" what people needed (but not what they resented). Do you suppose a dozen years and many millions of dollars in wealth might have affected that?
On second thought, maybe Mr. Krugman should have joined her!
33
Professor Krugman makes some good points, but he overlooks the most important one in this past election: Hillary Clinton was widely (and deservedly) perceived as a representative of the political establishment, and Donald Trump was not. Running on a genuinely progressive platform was not enough to dispell this perception. It was this, along with longstanding antipathy towards the Clintons, that brought about the losses in key swing states. Does that count as identity politics? I'm not sure, but in a "change" election, it was the crucial dynamic. A genuinely progressive populist candidate for the Democrats would not have carried the same burden.
2
What does Trump's support among rural non-college educated whites say about the education systems in their communities? What experiences in college open the minds of people from those same communities such that they can see Trump for what he is - a con man. The cons are going to continue unless the press becomes relentless in its investigation and publication of everything Trump does. It must be as relentless as the Republican attacks on Hillary that occurred oveeer the last 20 years.
1
It was so easy to convince people who feel that they have "played by the rules" all their lives and are now in economic distress that their troubles have been caused by "those people," and to distract them from the true cause of their difficulties--the oligarchs controlling the message--banks, giant corporations, mining bosses and their toady legislators. The racist underbelly of this message was entirely evident, and when Hillary Clinton correctly dared to articulate it, she was excoriated. The rich and powerful have once again managed to cheat, lie and steal their way into controlling our political system and maintaining their grip on our nation.
4
The fact that the white working-class has voted for Trump can be seen as an extension of their anti-union beliefs; and identification with the corporation.
They fell for the lie that unions are for minority groups, while white success is "corporate."
Thus, they have deluded themselves into believing that the ultimate symbol of the "corporate man," the billionaire Donald Trump, is actually just like them; or, he is who they would be were it not for those dang minorities and foreigners.
To them, hope springs eternal in Trump. One day, "Big Man" Trump willing, they will take their rightful places along side him, or so the delusion goes.
They fell for the lie that unions are for minority groups, while white success is "corporate."
Thus, they have deluded themselves into believing that the ultimate symbol of the "corporate man," the billionaire Donald Trump, is actually just like them; or, he is who they would be were it not for those dang minorities and foreigners.
To them, hope springs eternal in Trump. One day, "Big Man" Trump willing, they will take their rightful places along side him, or so the delusion goes.
1
True. Propaganda has worked. 25 years of fox and more have led this group off track
It's love, Professor. Don't you remember? "We love the under-educated."
1
People vote their bigotry ahead of their self interest. Don't remember who said that but seems an adequate answer to Mr. Krugman's question.
1
Hillary Clinton won the popular vote by more than two million, and she would probably be president-elect if the director of the F.B.I. hadn’t laid such a heavy thumb on the scales, just days before the election.
--------------------
Had she not set up a secret server in the first place the F.B.I. would never have investigated her.
--------------------
Had she not set up a secret server in the first place the F.B.I. would never have investigated her.
3
Mr. Trump’s knowledge of economics and business consists of the following:
Borrow as much money as you can, wherever you can, as often as you can. Make extravagant promises to your lenders, without ever regretting any of your failures to deliver on those promises. Shortchange your lenders, business partners, employees, tenants and customers without mercy. Deliver shoddy goods wherever possible, preferably to desperate people who are unable to defend themselves. When times get bad, empty the safe, get out of town on the next fast train leaving all the innocent bystanders behind you with empty paper bags in their hands. Hide your nefarious business practices behind phalanxes of lawyers wielding non-disclosure agreements, lawsuits and bankruptcy filings.
This is the same man we’ve just armed with a Republican House and Senate that possesses the ability to borrow and print money until the cows come home and a meanness of spirit equal to his.
Let the good times roll on and on and on.
Borrow as much money as you can, wherever you can, as often as you can. Make extravagant promises to your lenders, without ever regretting any of your failures to deliver on those promises. Shortchange your lenders, business partners, employees, tenants and customers without mercy. Deliver shoddy goods wherever possible, preferably to desperate people who are unable to defend themselves. When times get bad, empty the safe, get out of town on the next fast train leaving all the innocent bystanders behind you with empty paper bags in their hands. Hide your nefarious business practices behind phalanxes of lawyers wielding non-disclosure agreements, lawsuits and bankruptcy filings.
This is the same man we’ve just armed with a Republican House and Senate that possesses the ability to borrow and print money until the cows come home and a meanness of spirit equal to his.
Let the good times roll on and on and on.
2
I, too am confident, Dr. Krugman, that you fail to understand the resentment that is coursing through the veins of The People of our great country.
You are one of the ones that has preached to the fullest your "better understanding" of all things American and all things politic without ever stepping outside of your academic bubble...and considerable salary...actually to find out how people are living their lives from hand-to-mouth under the liberal road map and suffering the ignominy of seeing the middle class existence turn into poverty.
Your and your ilk have been promising now for more than five decade progress and prosperity that has only been delivered when non-liberals have been in office.
Perhaps it is time for you to take a sabbatical and transfer your research base to Middle America outside of the large urban areas.
Go work on a farm and study the finances of the farmer in good years and bad. Study the effects of failing education systems on the youth Middle America. See what they view of their futures says about their politics.
Maybe, just maybe, when you return to you comfortable apartment and sinecure in New York City, you will have learned something about our nation and its people.
But I doubt that you ever will take this perfectly reasonable suggestion.
You are one of the ones that has preached to the fullest your "better understanding" of all things American and all things politic without ever stepping outside of your academic bubble...and considerable salary...actually to find out how people are living their lives from hand-to-mouth under the liberal road map and suffering the ignominy of seeing the middle class existence turn into poverty.
Your and your ilk have been promising now for more than five decade progress and prosperity that has only been delivered when non-liberals have been in office.
Perhaps it is time for you to take a sabbatical and transfer your research base to Middle America outside of the large urban areas.
Go work on a farm and study the finances of the farmer in good years and bad. Study the effects of failing education systems on the youth Middle America. See what they view of their futures says about their politics.
Maybe, just maybe, when you return to you comfortable apartment and sinecure in New York City, you will have learned something about our nation and its people.
But I doubt that you ever will take this perfectly reasonable suggestion.
8
"I don't see" is Krugman's favorite excuse.
If you don't see, you are beyond hope.
You think in left wing terms. People did NOT vote against their interests.
You say that your side didn't explain enough. Your explaining won't help.
You should (but don't) see, Dr. Krugman, that they understand their interests more than you do. That is the most serious affectation, and failing, of the academic left.
It does not help the Left that you keep calling us names. Trump didn't.
Trump didn't use the racist and classist smears that Hillary, you, and
the whole left apparatus still does, that you do in this article
of which are a truly anointed part. You say he was racist ... he wasn't,
what you call racist we call attacking criminals (its essentially impossible to live in the USA without a legal, still valid, visa without committing a crime).
And yes, Trump voters did make rational economic decisions ... they supported throwing out of the country people illegally taking up jobs. The Left most certainly courted them.
You don't understand.
If you don't see, you are beyond hope.
You think in left wing terms. People did NOT vote against their interests.
You say that your side didn't explain enough. Your explaining won't help.
You should (but don't) see, Dr. Krugman, that they understand their interests more than you do. That is the most serious affectation, and failing, of the academic left.
It does not help the Left that you keep calling us names. Trump didn't.
Trump didn't use the racist and classist smears that Hillary, you, and
the whole left apparatus still does, that you do in this article
of which are a truly anointed part. You say he was racist ... he wasn't,
what you call racist we call attacking criminals (its essentially impossible to live in the USA without a legal, still valid, visa without committing a crime).
And yes, Trump voters did make rational economic decisions ... they supported throwing out of the country people illegally taking up jobs. The Left most certainly courted them.
You don't understand.
4
Suggest everyone look up Thomas Frank's seminal 2004 book called "What's the Matter with Kansas?" to recall how the Republicans always shaft the least we'll-off, ill-informed, gullible people who vote for them. Trump and his cohort look like they're already back pedaling and reneging on every major issue for which they promised these voters "solutions." The only question remaining this time around is whether the Trump voters will realize they've been played - once again.
"things like guaranteed health care and higher minimum wages." What good is a higher minimum wage if a coal miner doesn't have a job in the first place?
4
Curious that an alleged economist doesn't get it. Of the 11.6 million jobs created since 2010, only 80,000 went to those with a college degree. And Democrats don't know why they didn't get those votes?
And do Democrat's think that all those jobs created and filled by college grads were great jobs? Or were they menial jobs filled by the over qualified student debt laden who are disgusted with the job market?
Get it yet?
And do Democrat's think that all those jobs created and filled by college grads were great jobs? Or were they menial jobs filled by the over qualified student debt laden who are disgusted with the job market?
Get it yet?
8
So what's the solution Dr. Krugman? You are right to tell the reaction of the miners from Kentucky voting against their interests but what about the African Americans from Penn, Michigan and Wisconsin not voting in sufficient numbers to the detriment of their interests. Obamas campaigned vigorously for Hillary because they knew his legacies will be wipe out with a Trump victory. NYT interviews of those non voters showed they were indifferent to the outcome because Hillary is not Obama. Can any white politician get close to the support of Obama? Hillary would have won those states and the electoral college if they voted close to the numbers they turned out for Obama. So African Americans will probably suffer the most from A Trump presidency just as they are the most affected by Clarence Thomas because he represented a "Black Seat", and Black Caucus can bemoan gerrymandering while they are safe behind 100% minority districts to the detriment of democrats.
1
If Professor Krugman would go back to FDR and even Eisenhower, he would probably be able to see the contours of not just a bit more populism but a lot more populism. Or call it New Deal-ism if you prefer. That is, you create a very large infrastructure program -- a super Interstate Highway System-scaled plan -- which in turn will lead to demand for American factory products, which means more American factories -- if, and this is a big if, you discard the WTO,etc provisions preventing countries from using domestic content requirements (although there may be an exception for infrastructure). If the plan is big enough it will generate so many construction and manufacturing jobs that the white working class can pull the rug from under the Republicans, essentially, and form a new coalition within the Democratic party. I explain more here, http://www.globalteachin.com/uncategorized/a-jobs-program-to-defeat-trump, and you can see an example of a large-scale infrastructure program, including an Interstate Wind System and an Interstate High-Speed Rail System, at GreenNewDealPlan.com
Yeah, yeah we're really racist out here in Macomb County.
Somehow, race didn't seem to matter to us when we voted for Barack Obama twice but now it comes into play when we didn't vote for Hillary Clinton. Why were we able to look beyond race then but not now? Trump beat Hillary here on Obama turf by such a large margin that he won the entire state thanks to us.
Wanna know a secret?
There's a lot of votes to be had in Michigan by standing in front of a closed auto plant and railing against NAFTA and TPP. People here respond to that. We want jobs, not handouts. And we're not happy about having free trade with countries that pay workers 50 cents an hour. Note the strategy worked well for Bernie when he won the state.
Now there's also a point to be had too as to why the assorted insults, degeneration, Trump University scam, and outright lies that Trump told didn't seem to phase us or make him too toxic to consider as it seems too egregious for to the pundits who write for this paper to understand.
You want to label us racists? Well, it's true that we're not sympathetic to a lot of what passes for social justice these days. Hectoring us that we have white privilege when our reality is that the concept is laughably absurd. We like our police and the Founding Fathers. We don't kneel during the national anthem. Affirmative Action is a source of derision as are safe spaces. If that's racist to you so be it but we've had enough white shaming and being the racial punching bag.
Somehow, race didn't seem to matter to us when we voted for Barack Obama twice but now it comes into play when we didn't vote for Hillary Clinton. Why were we able to look beyond race then but not now? Trump beat Hillary here on Obama turf by such a large margin that he won the entire state thanks to us.
Wanna know a secret?
There's a lot of votes to be had in Michigan by standing in front of a closed auto plant and railing against NAFTA and TPP. People here respond to that. We want jobs, not handouts. And we're not happy about having free trade with countries that pay workers 50 cents an hour. Note the strategy worked well for Bernie when he won the state.
Now there's also a point to be had too as to why the assorted insults, degeneration, Trump University scam, and outright lies that Trump told didn't seem to phase us or make him too toxic to consider as it seems too egregious for to the pundits who write for this paper to understand.
You want to label us racists? Well, it's true that we're not sympathetic to a lot of what passes for social justice these days. Hectoring us that we have white privilege when our reality is that the concept is laughably absurd. We like our police and the Founding Fathers. We don't kneel during the national anthem. Affirmative Action is a source of derision as are safe spaces. If that's racist to you so be it but we've had enough white shaming and being the racial punching bag.
6
Look, I supported Bernie Sanders and voted for Hillary Clinton in the general election, so I'm not against Mrs. Clinton or the Democrats, but Professor Krugman, you are again ignoring reality here. Had Hillary Clinton not just repeatedly thrown out facts and policies, but created a compelling, emotionally engaging, pro-change economic NARRATIVE, as Barack Obama did, she'd have won Wisconsin, Michigan, and Pennsylvania, and the presidency. That's it.
She's behind by only 27,000 or so votes in Wisconsin, 11,000 in Michigan, and 68,000 votes in Pennsylvania. Many of those voters had voted for BARACK OBAMA. But rather than deal with this, you harp on Kentucky. You know what, national Democrats aren't winning Kentucky unless they find a credible, Southern white working class liberal, like a Bill Clinton--or a westerner like Brian Schweitzer--who can talk about blue collar issues without disdain or as if they're a fantasy.
But they CAN win the Rust Belt again, including in 4 years, if they look at how appealing Bernie Sanders--and Barack Obama--was, and why. Even many Democrats are tired of the neoliberalism that Clinton, and you and so many others keep trying to sell. It is just not going to work anymore, and that includes for Trump and the GOP, who think they can pull another Bush-type fast one on us.
Let's see if you and the mainstream press speak out if they try to.
She's behind by only 27,000 or so votes in Wisconsin, 11,000 in Michigan, and 68,000 votes in Pennsylvania. Many of those voters had voted for BARACK OBAMA. But rather than deal with this, you harp on Kentucky. You know what, national Democrats aren't winning Kentucky unless they find a credible, Southern white working class liberal, like a Bill Clinton--or a westerner like Brian Schweitzer--who can talk about blue collar issues without disdain or as if they're a fantasy.
But they CAN win the Rust Belt again, including in 4 years, if they look at how appealing Bernie Sanders--and Barack Obama--was, and why. Even many Democrats are tired of the neoliberalism that Clinton, and you and so many others keep trying to sell. It is just not going to work anymore, and that includes for Trump and the GOP, who think they can pull another Bush-type fast one on us.
Let's see if you and the mainstream press speak out if they try to.
4
Fundamental misunderstanding of politics at this level. It's not just policies that win elections. It's charismatic, electrifying personalities. Think Mario Cuomo, Barack Obama, Ronald Reagan. And now, unfortunately, Donald Trump.
6
Trump told Americans he would keep America white, and they voted for him. The key issue that won Mr. Trump the election was immigration. This is also evident in Europe, where millions of non-white immigrants from the Middle-East and Africa are moving into Europe to escape their failed states, and the white-power parties are gaining influence.
Brexit was a backlash against this immigration; it was not an economic vote as trade among the high-wage European countries is helping, not hurting job creation.
I'm reminded of the Frederick Douglass quote: "Power concedes nothing without a demand. It never did and it never will." Whites aren't going to give up power to non-whites without a fight, and the Electoral College gives the rural white parts of the country a dis-proportionate say in elections.
Brexit was a backlash against this immigration; it was not an economic vote as trade among the high-wage European countries is helping, not hurting job creation.
I'm reminded of the Frederick Douglass quote: "Power concedes nothing without a demand. It never did and it never will." Whites aren't going to give up power to non-whites without a fight, and the Electoral College gives the rural white parts of the country a dis-proportionate say in elections.
2
This is an excellent analysis. As Krugman points out, the major group driving the Trump victory was the group of less educated white voters....tho these folks may have been economically disaffected, they were not the millennials attracted to Bernie and his focus on the shrinking middle class, the concentration of wealth at the top and so on. And, again as pointed out here, they clearly voted against their economic self interest. This suggests strongly that some other factor was more important to them than economics. And, fear of losing "identify" is probably a major contender for what that other factor is. Certainly one of the major explanations for Brexit is that the English (again the less educated, less wealthy) were afraid of losing their identiy and having their values submerged in the EU. I would contend that those same forces drove this election: that less educated white voters are afraid of losing their identify to immigrants, muslims, blacks and even women! They are afraid of being displaced! To change the system we somehow need to help folks like this to overcome their fears of being swallowed up....this is essentially what Trump did by making them feel they would be part of the "newly" great America.
1
In addition to the many valid reasons raised in this article and readers' comments is the fact that Donald Trump is a celebrity and an entertainer. We have a population that loves celebrities and wants to be entertained. He didn't win the majority of votes, but I think this helps explain why he won so many.
1
Trump did win the majority of votes. The votes that count. And, no one won the majority of votes, even with Bey Z and Hollywood entertaining the 1%ers down home in the Hamptons.
1
Prof. K. is correct, the root of Trump's "victory" was cultural, not economic. The real divide in this election was the rural culture vs. the urban-suburban culture. And as we now all too painfully know, the Electoral College is heavily weighted toward the rural states.
One need only to come here to Maine to see what happened in this election. The more-urbanized, coastal first congressional district voted overwhelmingly for Clinton, while the rural second district voted for Trump, gaining him one electoral vote under Maine law.
In just a ten-minute drive inland from Portland, the signs dramatically shifted from "Clinton-Kaine" to "Hillary for Prison" and much worse. Thus Trump had a much easier task of it in this campaign, as the white, rural culture is largely monolithic, by definition, and responds to a simple, much-repeated message of cultural resentment, whereas the urban culture is widely diverse, requiring a multitude of nuanced messages in order to produce an equivalent vote.
Again, throw in the Electoral College bias, and it's not hard to see how the 2016 election was largely a Rural Revolt.
One need only to come here to Maine to see what happened in this election. The more-urbanized, coastal first congressional district voted overwhelmingly for Clinton, while the rural second district voted for Trump, gaining him one electoral vote under Maine law.
In just a ten-minute drive inland from Portland, the signs dramatically shifted from "Clinton-Kaine" to "Hillary for Prison" and much worse. Thus Trump had a much easier task of it in this campaign, as the white, rural culture is largely monolithic, by definition, and responds to a simple, much-repeated message of cultural resentment, whereas the urban culture is widely diverse, requiring a multitude of nuanced messages in order to produce an equivalent vote.
Again, throw in the Electoral College bias, and it's not hard to see how the 2016 election was largely a Rural Revolt.
3
Trump won for several reasons:
1) Hillary was a poor campaigner. Her para-linguistics were awful, her tone reeked with arrogance and obfuscation and her campaign did not have a credible inclusive theme. She came across more as a self centered (I'm with her rather than she's for me.) candidate instead of a public service candidate.
2) Hillary was a candidate to whom (she thought) laws did not apply and she was clearly protected and nurtured by a vast conspiracy of the Democrat party establishment that worked to derail Bernie from the start.
3) Trump used the media (including social networks) brilliantly and campaigned on a shoestring budget.
4) Trump's team had better stats and demographics and they used them effectively.
5) There is real lingering anger and fear in the mid-west after 40 years of factory closings and economic decline.
6) Despite having a long resume, Hillary did not have a list of accomplishments to point to, while Trump highlighted her many failures.
7) This was a change election. Most working people are not doing as well as they were 10, 20, 30 and 40 years ago. Hillary did not pay attention to these people.
1) Hillary was a poor campaigner. Her para-linguistics were awful, her tone reeked with arrogance and obfuscation and her campaign did not have a credible inclusive theme. She came across more as a self centered (I'm with her rather than she's for me.) candidate instead of a public service candidate.
2) Hillary was a candidate to whom (she thought) laws did not apply and she was clearly protected and nurtured by a vast conspiracy of the Democrat party establishment that worked to derail Bernie from the start.
3) Trump used the media (including social networks) brilliantly and campaigned on a shoestring budget.
4) Trump's team had better stats and demographics and they used them effectively.
5) There is real lingering anger and fear in the mid-west after 40 years of factory closings and economic decline.
6) Despite having a long resume, Hillary did not have a list of accomplishments to point to, while Trump highlighted her many failures.
7) This was a change election. Most working people are not doing as well as they were 10, 20, 30 and 40 years ago. Hillary did not pay attention to these people.
6
I disagree. Clinton ran a fine campaign. Also, are you a fan of the electoral college? Do you really think it is a fair system? If Clinton had become president elect while losing the popular vote by two million, would you have been okay with that? Because Trump didn't really win the election; Clinton did, by two million votes. Think about that when you are explaining why she "lost".
8) Hillary paid attention to the Billionaire Club in Hollywood, Silicone Valley, the Hamptons, Martha's Vineyard and Wall Street. Her first trip after the DNC was to Omaha to catch up with Warren at a $150,000 a plate lunch. No red neck deplorables were guests, they just served the food. Warren was his avuncular self.
We've been told that the electoral college exists to ensure that if the public votes a demagogue as president then it will step in and vote to ensure that the demagogue will not get the presidency.
If that's not the case, then the electoral college is worthless. We have a demagogue elected to the presidency, and now it's time for the electoral college to take a stand.
If that's not the case, then the electoral college is worthless. We have a demagogue elected to the presidency, and now it's time for the electoral college to take a stand.
6
So, your candidate lost and you want to alter the Constitution so you can have your way. Very enlightened, but so typical of Boston.
2
Sad to say, but few (maybe 1-5% at most) voters will really understand causes and effects of economic policies and actions, and so are vulnerable to believing disinformation such as that of the GOP. So the vote comes down to a gut feeling of the candidate being "for me or against me" and their personal likeability to the voter. I remember challenging one W. Bush voter in 2000 with the question: "Who do you want flying the plane? The guy who might be fun to have a beer with, or the person who understands the plane well enough to handle an engine falling off?" That stumped him. I believe Trump also won votes merely on his outsiderness + celebrity + his ability to maniupulate the media from his celebrity culture experiences - people want to be friends with celebrities and he played up "only he" can do it. His rhetoric was like Tom Waits' great satire on marketing, "Step Right Up" about a product that will do everything you dream of, only $9.95. Since nothing that happens in the world has less than five critical causes behind it, and people are generally too lazy to search for at least five when trying to understand things, the demagogue-ish strategies will continues to work until people choose to use more disciplined thinking when electing leaders. But since it was clear Trump was lying, and a prudent person would avoid doing any business with a consistent liar, I remain amazed and ashamed that so many US voters would ignore that as well.
3
Mr. Krugman does not know what to do. A big part of Mr. Krugman's failure is that he can't get his head around the fact that in general people want to be strong and independent, yet his party only offers ways to manage their decline.
Trump had success with white voters who in the previous election voted for President Obama. Romney was a great candidate, yet he lost most of the Midwest due to economic populism that went against him. People want to have hope, and the left can't seem to offer it.
Trump had success with white voters who in the previous election voted for President Obama. Romney was a great candidate, yet he lost most of the Midwest due to economic populism that went against him. People want to have hope, and the left can't seem to offer it.
3
Your last sentence is the most important -- figuring out why working classes continue to vote against their economic interest. I think your point about imagined being looked down on and very real, actual and at times loud demeaning attitudes is actually the critical point.
1
The explicit racism about so called "white voters" is astounding. Are "white people" the only people who work in America? Trump appealed to all persons – despite his invective – who don't feel they've gotten a fair shake. It is time for the democrats to get out of the balkanization business and find the common humanity of America and Americans.
One thing everyone seems to miss in regards to identity politics is that being a Republican is very much part of a lot of people's identity. A huge number of people think of themselves as being Republicans in spite of the fact that they don't agree with much of what the Republican party stands for. Trump was a repudiation of the Republican establishment first and foremost, and many of these folks (who are actually nice people that would give the shirt off their backs to help you out) are never going to vote for a "liberal". I would know. I come from a Republican family and voted Republican right up until Obama. Then I took some on-line test to see if I was a conservative or a liberal, and wouldn't you it, I'm a dag gum liberal!
2
White people used to think we were the good guys. Now we're not, going all the way back to Columbus. People are tired of being the bad guys.
1
Please acknowledge all the not nice things while people have actively done or allowed to be done in the name of their advancement. When you do that, the truth will set you free and you will be able to work toward righting those wrongs which are still on-going whether you believe it or not.
Listening to my friends and many pundits try to explain THE reason HRC lost, irks me to no end. When it looked like she was going to win, it still seemed that Trump would have tens of millions of people voting for him and THATS what scared me - that they walk among us, they are neighbors and the shop keeper we chat with. I dont know if we can easily find an answer, one common thread, more that his appeal to racism, was that each heard what appealed to them.
Recently I spoke with a man I have know for years who is an immigrant from Egypt - he loves Trump. The guy that works ( not owns ) the stationary store, from Pakistan - trump supporter, and the man from Ecuador who was painting on my street - he too trump supporter! I know this because I actually asked them how they feel with him in the WH. To my surprise they all felt good - because?
" It's not me he's after - its the ......OTHERS!"
thats it in a nutshell - the republican party has always been one of exclusion - trump has channeled that to perfection - dividing the Nation into micro angers.
This is a world wide phenomena - and self loathing ( the democrats ) is not where the answer lies. Standing against trumpism is.
Recently I spoke with a man I have know for years who is an immigrant from Egypt - he loves Trump. The guy that works ( not owns ) the stationary store, from Pakistan - trump supporter, and the man from Ecuador who was painting on my street - he too trump supporter! I know this because I actually asked them how they feel with him in the WH. To my surprise they all felt good - because?
" It's not me he's after - its the ......OTHERS!"
thats it in a nutshell - the republican party has always been one of exclusion - trump has channeled that to perfection - dividing the Nation into micro angers.
This is a world wide phenomena - and self loathing ( the democrats ) is not where the answer lies. Standing against trumpism is.
2
The Dems visibly supported marginal groups and interests like BLM and transgender bathroom rights, ahead of "whites without a college degree". The phrase itself is dismissive and demeaning.
That's what people in Clay County saw, and in many other communities as well.
They saw no other recourse. And who can blame them?
That's what people in Clay County saw, and in many other communities as well.
They saw no other recourse. And who can blame them?
3
So Trump saying he loved the uneducated wasn't demeaning? Of course not! He's a white man so it's clearly a term of endearment...
I see it as a marketing problem. First, you can't assume, as this article does that people are stupid and are not able to see beyond their emotions. Sure, if you just play to emotions you're going to get the uninformed electorate. We need the media to start doing their job and very soon. Explain clearly why one payer health care would greatly benefit them, how much more is spent by private insurers, what they should be doing in order to earn a living wage, what type and level of education will benefit their children. The media has not done its job of bombarding people with facts in a manner that will motivate the common citizen to seek true change. Since you are part of the media, Mr. Krugman, you need to look inward and ask how people in your field have failed in getting the reality of the essential issues across to the average American.
1
Because the media assumes things are "too complicated" to explain so they do the easy thing. Dr. Krugman, actually, tries to explain complex issues across a series of editorials as he is doing here. He does not treat his audience as though they are stupid. Unfortunately, many people who write comments here don't seem to pay attention to the facts provided.
Misallocation of resources had a lot to do with the Electoral College. After Comey pulled his stunt, the overconfident Clinton campaign should have immediately pulled the plug on Arizona and redeployed the resources to the basic Blue Wall: Michigan, Wisconsin, and Pennsylvania.
2
Krugman may be mystified, but it’s no mystery. Kentuckians and others like them voted based on Race, Religion and Guns, with Republicans and the Roberts SCOTUS facilitating their views.
Racism still exists in this country as we see most whites, particularly in areas where there are few blacks, voting for the party representing whites and against the party they feel represents people of color. For Roberts to claim racism doesn’t exist in the 21st century is either blind ignorance or racist. He is not ignorant. Elections aren’t stolen by the lack of voter IDs, but by creating roadblocks for people you don’t want to vote.
During the 1960s SCOTUS clearly stated that you couldn’t claim religious freedom as the basis for denying some people access. Today, Roberts and his team claim religious freedom allows people to deny rights to gays or to those seeking abortions.
Whites demand gun rights, but only for themselves. Today, another black teenager was killed by a white man claiming he felt threatened by a black teenager with a gun, except there was no gun. We have heard it all before. What we haven’t heard of is anyone claiming he killed claiming he felt threatened by a white man, who had a disappearing gun. Demand a white man have a gun, shoot a black man if he has a gun. Roberts and SCOTUS agrees.
Racism still exists in this country as we see most whites, particularly in areas where there are few blacks, voting for the party representing whites and against the party they feel represents people of color. For Roberts to claim racism doesn’t exist in the 21st century is either blind ignorance or racist. He is not ignorant. Elections aren’t stolen by the lack of voter IDs, but by creating roadblocks for people you don’t want to vote.
During the 1960s SCOTUS clearly stated that you couldn’t claim religious freedom as the basis for denying some people access. Today, Roberts and his team claim religious freedom allows people to deny rights to gays or to those seeking abortions.
Whites demand gun rights, but only for themselves. Today, another black teenager was killed by a white man claiming he felt threatened by a black teenager with a gun, except there was no gun. We have heard it all before. What we haven’t heard of is anyone claiming he killed claiming he felt threatened by a white man, who had a disappearing gun. Demand a white man have a gun, shoot a black man if he has a gun. Roberts and SCOTUS agrees.
2
It's an oddly authoritarian form of economics to imagine that you know better than the beknighted people about their own economic interests. Professor Krugman is Exhibit A about why those beknighted people may know of what they speak and vote.
3
The Republicans are masters at getting people to vote against their own economic interests, really going back to Reagan. Trump got the vote of people angry in general at the political system. The favorable rating of Congress as I recall was around 20%. I voted for Mrs. Clinton, but I would have given an unfavorable rating to Congress just like any Trump supporter. The difference between me and them is that I blame the Republicans in Congress for governmental gridlock. The Democrats never made the election a referendum on the Republican-controlled Congress. Mrs. Clinton had to rebrand Trump as a deplorable human being, which I think she did successfully, but she failed to run against the obstructionist Republican Party. Why? I think she hoped to get enough support from "traditional" Republicans who were appalled by Trump to get over the top. And it almost worked. DuPage County west of Chicago went for Mrs. Clinton. Why did she lose the Electoral College? In addition to the usual misguided third party voters, in WI, MI, NC and PA the Republican voter suppression efforts worked just well enough to keep her supporters from voting.
When I grew up in the '50s and '60s, the Democrats were essentially the Labor Party with academicians and minorities in support. By the '90s, they were they had splintered, largely in support of minorities--racial, sexual and religious. Some of the labor unions have held for them, but the ordinary "Meet John Doe" types departed the pattern, never to return. They vote for Republicans or Independents or just don't vote. BTW, the turnout this election was quite high.
2
In the '50's and '60's the unions pushed the Dem message to their workers, and even in the media.
Today, no one I can see pushes their working people message. Coming on once a month on MSNBC or CNN does not cut it.
The Dems need to be the Party of ALL Workers, of all identities.
But they seem to have no idea how to actually do this.
Today, no one I can see pushes their working people message. Coming on once a month on MSNBC or CNN does not cut it.
The Dems need to be the Party of ALL Workers, of all identities.
But they seem to have no idea how to actually do this.
2
Here’s the text of the email I sent to the DNC before the election, under the heading “It’s the Economy Stupid”. (I don’t think the lack of a message about the economy is the only problem with the Democrats’ outreach, or lack of it, but I believe it’s a major part.):
Half the voters don’t care that you think Trump is a racist.
They care that he promises better days.
These people should be the Democrats’ constituency, not the constituency of someone born into a life of wealth and privilege, and who has never demonstrated any concern for anyone but himself.
Bernie Sanders tapped into some of this constituency also. I believe these people feel that they are ignored by mainstream Democrats.
Maybe in the short term, the Democrats can win the presidential election by focusing on Trump’s character flaws, but can they win Congress? I think you have to begin undermining the Republicans’ false claims that they are better for the economy and that they promote achieving the American Dream for all Americans, not just those who already have wealth and privilege.
The Democrats have to begin to persuade American voters that they can best restore the American Dream to them, which many feel is out of reach.
Half the voters don’t care that you think Trump is a racist.
They care that he promises better days.
These people should be the Democrats’ constituency, not the constituency of someone born into a life of wealth and privilege, and who has never demonstrated any concern for anyone but himself.
Bernie Sanders tapped into some of this constituency also. I believe these people feel that they are ignored by mainstream Democrats.
Maybe in the short term, the Democrats can win the presidential election by focusing on Trump’s character flaws, but can they win Congress? I think you have to begin undermining the Republicans’ false claims that they are better for the economy and that they promote achieving the American Dream for all Americans, not just those who already have wealth and privilege.
The Democrats have to begin to persuade American voters that they can best restore the American Dream to them, which many feel is out of reach.
Thanks Dr. K. Trump is a backlash to Obama and the coming demographic changes in the US. The alt-right has correctly identified the problem even though they are on the morally wrong side. Until white america recognizes this in themselves and deals with this issue head on we will not make progress. Democrats need to help the majority them understand that their fear, while natural, is unreasonable and that there are those who seek to exploit that fear to their own advantage.
3
Krugman is right about policy and its limited effects due to lack of coverage and these voters difficulty in making the connection between policy and their own interests, but I think he misses a vital point.
Sanders and other progressives are also talking about a retail politics approach that would tie their policies to effective appeals to these voters. It is an astounding fact that the GOP has been so successful in getting these voters to vote against their own interests with appeals to cultural and racial animosities. This salesmanship is where the Democrats and progressives have utterly failed.
Take the tax cuts example. The GOP has been successful by selling tax cuts for the rich by tapping into a general dislike of taxes and government. The actual policies are not what they are selling. They sell the sizzle of tax cuts. They can promise that the cuts will help the middle class, get the votes and then do as they please. It's disingenuous and reprehensible. But - it works.
The Democrats and progressive have to learn the lesson and get in the selling game.
Sanders and other progressives are also talking about a retail politics approach that would tie their policies to effective appeals to these voters. It is an astounding fact that the GOP has been so successful in getting these voters to vote against their own interests with appeals to cultural and racial animosities. This salesmanship is where the Democrats and progressives have utterly failed.
Take the tax cuts example. The GOP has been successful by selling tax cuts for the rich by tapping into a general dislike of taxes and government. The actual policies are not what they are selling. They sell the sizzle of tax cuts. They can promise that the cuts will help the middle class, get the votes and then do as they please. It's disingenuous and reprehensible. But - it works.
The Democrats and progressive have to learn the lesson and get in the selling game.
5
Writing from Canada, Interesting article. However, I think the author is wrong. I think that the video about the Alt Right conference had it right. America's white working class that voted for Trump want to live in a country where all the benefits go to them because they are white. They want slavery to be brought back, expressly for their benefit. They want jobs reserved for them, and all other things like places on buses, seats at a restaurant, seats in a cinema, and the right to vote; all to be reserved for them because their skin is white. In other words, they want apartheid.
Having had a first hand experience of apartheid, I can say it does not work. But, somehow, this problem has to be fixed!
Having had a first hand experience of apartheid, I can say it does not work. But, somehow, this problem has to be fixed!
4
Because democrats and liberals in the UK in the thrall of identity politics presented the white working class male as the embodiment of all that was to be despised - uncouth, racist, sexist, stupid, homophobic which they contrasted with themselves. "Chavs" was the UK pejorative of choice by the chattering classes. Those without university education got fed up and were responsive to the likes of Farage and Trump who said simply "you are decent but poor and I will help you". Messages that before Vietnam and rise of identity politics were the mantra of the left. When the left departed from this message the strongmen picked it up to great effect.
3
For all of his smarts, Dr. K still doesn't understand what happened in the election, so he has to lean on the popular vote and FBI chief Comey for excuses. After shilling for Her Royal Clintonness and slamming Bernie Sanders during the election, does he still think that the Chipotle incident, her coal mining speech, the deplorables comment, and the $225k Wall Street speeches had no effect on the man and woman on the street, that it didn't show disdain for them, and her comfort with the financial elites?
And if you want deplorables, how about the Wall Street crowd relying on trading and money-making rather than real investing in businesses that make things, while bringing on the big recession?
Meanwhile, Sanders and Elizabeth Warren are pointing out what the Dems need to do, but will they listen? Dr. K seems to still enjoy slamming Sanders.
And if you want deplorables, how about the Wall Street crowd relying on trading and money-making rather than real investing in businesses that make things, while bringing on the big recession?
Meanwhile, Sanders and Elizabeth Warren are pointing out what the Dems need to do, but will they listen? Dr. K seems to still enjoy slamming Sanders.
9
Sanders is not the answer. He would have lost way worse than Clinton did. See:
http://www.newsweek.com/myths-cost-democrats-presidential-election-521044
("...Sanders was on unemployment until his mid-30s.")
Let's not lose sight of the fact that Clinton got two million more votes. That kind of blunts your argument, I believe. All Americans should be ashamed that we have a system that allows the loser to win. That should be the focus of our anger.
http://www.newsweek.com/myths-cost-democrats-presidential-election-521044
("...Sanders was on unemployment until his mid-30s.")
Let's not lose sight of the fact that Clinton got two million more votes. That kind of blunts your argument, I believe. All Americans should be ashamed that we have a system that allows the loser to win. That should be the focus of our anger.
Read the new book by JD Vance , Hillbilly Elegy, to get some insight into the conundrum of huge numbers of these people voting against their own best interests. "Clinging to guns and Bibles" really seems to be more important to many of these folks than education, health care, job training for a new competive world economy.
I also don't calling themselves Christian if they really believe the words and philosophy of Jesus of Nazareth who preached of caring for the poor, loving your enemies and the Good Samaritan.
I can understand strong opposition to abortion if you believe an unborn child is a person ( when they develop personhood is a debated point ). If you feel abortion is murdering a child it is hard to see how you could vote for a candidate who supports it, even if their other positions help you.
I can also understand the visceral disgust for academic political correctness that borders on the ridiculous (safe spaces, trigger words etc...).
Perhaps if the Dems address some of their own foolish appearances at the left fringe extreme of the party they might convince some of these people to actually vote for candidates whose policy positions would improve their lives.
I also don't calling themselves Christian if they really believe the words and philosophy of Jesus of Nazareth who preached of caring for the poor, loving your enemies and the Good Samaritan.
I can understand strong opposition to abortion if you believe an unborn child is a person ( when they develop personhood is a debated point ). If you feel abortion is murdering a child it is hard to see how you could vote for a candidate who supports it, even if their other positions help you.
I can also understand the visceral disgust for academic political correctness that borders on the ridiculous (safe spaces, trigger words etc...).
Perhaps if the Dems address some of their own foolish appearances at the left fringe extreme of the party they might convince some of these people to actually vote for candidates whose policy positions would improve their lives.
This liberal American is DONE with the Rust Belt and South. Uneducated, unmotivated overt (and covert) racists---who quite frankly are the largest number of people on the public benefits they purport to hate. I would rather put my energy into assisting and supporting hardworking immigrants, than an inchoate army of layabouts. Watching Trump's administration dismantle the few safeguards left for poor whites will be nothing less than what they deserve.
Mrs. Clinton offered these groups investment in alternative energy jobs, a continuation and upgrade of the ACA, and child care options. Trump pandered to the lowest common denominator--fear. Fear of everyone different from the way they look, worship and think. They think they have been living in misery....their face in a con-man is about to take them to a whole new level--and it's their fault. No sympathy, none at all.
Mrs. Clinton offered these groups investment in alternative energy jobs, a continuation and upgrade of the ACA, and child care options. Trump pandered to the lowest common denominator--fear. Fear of everyone different from the way they look, worship and think. They think they have been living in misery....their face in a con-man is about to take them to a whole new level--and it's their fault. No sympathy, none at all.
6
Well said. Thank you for that clear opinion. This blaming of Clinton for the horror Trump will bring is nonsense.
Another nasty elitist from Cali heard from.
4
Krugman is right: a "bit more" populism won't solve Democrats' problems with white working class voters. But strong policies to improve their economic situation will.
FDR never had a problem winning white working class voters, and Democrats for a generation after FDR didn't either. That's because these voters knew where Democrats stood: WITH organized labor (Wagner Act), WITH the unemployed (CCC), WITH poorer older Americans (Social Security).
The Democrats under Obama missed a golden chance to be the party of universal health care. They missed a chance to shift the overall tax burden strongly from the middle class onto the 1% They missed a chance to be the party against home foreclosures during the 2008 bailout.
Sure, Obama's policies were somewhat better than the Republican alternatives. Sure, HIllary would have tossed white working class voters a few more crumbs than Donald Trump is likely to do. But that doesn't add up to enough to change the overall trends in this country, which Krugman should know are for ever greater economic inequality, and ever greater political powerlessness for working class voters.
And in the case of immigration policy, the white working class did not vote against its own economic interests in voting for Trump, it voted for those interests. Mass immigration is killing workers in construction, janitorial services, meat packing, and many other economic sectors. I won't hold my breath waiting for Krugman to acknowledge that, however!
FDR never had a problem winning white working class voters, and Democrats for a generation after FDR didn't either. That's because these voters knew where Democrats stood: WITH organized labor (Wagner Act), WITH the unemployed (CCC), WITH poorer older Americans (Social Security).
The Democrats under Obama missed a golden chance to be the party of universal health care. They missed a chance to shift the overall tax burden strongly from the middle class onto the 1% They missed a chance to be the party against home foreclosures during the 2008 bailout.
Sure, Obama's policies were somewhat better than the Republican alternatives. Sure, HIllary would have tossed white working class voters a few more crumbs than Donald Trump is likely to do. But that doesn't add up to enough to change the overall trends in this country, which Krugman should know are for ever greater economic inequality, and ever greater political powerlessness for working class voters.
And in the case of immigration policy, the white working class did not vote against its own economic interests in voting for Trump, it voted for those interests. Mass immigration is killing workers in construction, janitorial services, meat packing, and many other economic sectors. I won't hold my breath waiting for Krugman to acknowledge that, however!
10
The problem with this analysis is that the Republicans are not offering anything to working class voters, white or otherwise so why is everyone pointing the finger at the Democrats? Let's put some energy into dissecting the Republican policies and positions.
This is where I fault the so-called liberal media. In the attempts to be "fair", they focus on the Dems policies and issues, but only recently stopped parroting the Republican line. The media needs to turn the spotlight on Republican policies and the harm they have done to this country since the Reagan administration.
This is where I fault the so-called liberal media. In the attempts to be "fair", they focus on the Dems policies and issues, but only recently stopped parroting the Republican line. The media needs to turn the spotlight on Republican policies and the harm they have done to this country since the Reagan administration.
FDR never had a problem because he was on the radio all the time selling his programs. Of course, having the country in complete economic devastation brought about by GOP policies did not hurt, either.
Obama had the same chance, but did not sell it well to the rural constituency.
Optics are more important than the Dems realize. IMO, if Obama had put a few dozen CEOs on trial it would have made a LOT of people feel better. It would not have mattered if they were found guilty or not. He should have also pushed for more help for the people who actually lost their houses. At least he could have tried.
Obama had the same chance, but did not sell it well to the rural constituency.
Optics are more important than the Dems realize. IMO, if Obama had put a few dozen CEOs on trial it would have made a LOT of people feel better. It would not have mattered if they were found guilty or not. He should have also pushed for more help for the people who actually lost their houses. At least he could have tried.
1
Not to mention the truly heartless commenters from the Los Angeles area, who obviously relish their fellow citizens' misery.
2
Superbly prepared and capable as she was, what was needed in this campaign was the voice and empathy of a Bill Clinton, not a Hillary Clinton.
3
It's very simple. Democrats have no voice in Clay county and the heartland. The only voice heard there is that of Rush Limbaugh, Sean Hannity and the like who's mantra is that the only good democrat is a dead democrat. They did an excellent job of demonizing true/truthful news sources as "the mainstream media" and by extension, they as the only source of truth. Meanwhile when asked about the truth behind their speech, they fall back on "we're just entertainers."
Is this not Orwellian Newspeak where black is white and white is black? In Orwell's 1984, the Newspeak concept of Blackwhite has "two mutually contradictory meanings" depending on whether it is applied to an opponent"—" claiming that black is white, in contradiction of the plain facts"—or to a Party member—"a loyal willingness to say that black is white when Party discipline demands".
This blind faith can stem from respect for authority, fear, indoctrination, critical laziness, or gullibility. Orwell's blackwhite refers only to that caused by fear, indoctrination, or repression of critical thinking, rather than that caused by laziness or gullibility. A true Party member could automatically and without thought expunge any "incorrect" information and neatly replace it with the party line's "true" information.
In short, the right's grip on the media through Fox and Limbaugh IS now the mainstream media.
Is this not Orwellian Newspeak where black is white and white is black? In Orwell's 1984, the Newspeak concept of Blackwhite has "two mutually contradictory meanings" depending on whether it is applied to an opponent"—" claiming that black is white, in contradiction of the plain facts"—or to a Party member—"a loyal willingness to say that black is white when Party discipline demands".
This blind faith can stem from respect for authority, fear, indoctrination, critical laziness, or gullibility. Orwell's blackwhite refers only to that caused by fear, indoctrination, or repression of critical thinking, rather than that caused by laziness or gullibility. A true Party member could automatically and without thought expunge any "incorrect" information and neatly replace it with the party line's "true" information.
In short, the right's grip on the media through Fox and Limbaugh IS now the mainstream media.
2
Another great column. I think you missed something, though. Sure, Trump is gonna keep feeding the various resentments of his supporters to keep them on board, but he's gonna do something else, too. He's gonna exaggerate. Trump style. He's gonna spin every policy - no matter how harmful it might actually be to his supporters - as a win for the white working class. And - as long as he does the occasional bridge opening or runway repaving or pothole filling photo op - I think they'll fall for it.
3
For me, many who voted for Trump because he is going to bring their jobs back, I would ask: What about the adage, "Pull yourself up by your own bootstraps" that you tell everyone else to do? You complain about people living off the government (exactly what you are doing) and wanting the government out of your lives; yet, you vote for a president that is part of the government to bring back your jobs. Such an oxymoron thought.
Mitch McConnell came out an said to the people of coal country, it is not the governments place to bring back your jobs because it is a private business.
Anger and hate is eating people alive and the country is going to pay a steep price for it. We did for eight years under Bush/Cheney and that is going to look like a cakewalk compared to this disaster!
Mitch McConnell came out an said to the people of coal country, it is not the governments place to bring back your jobs because it is a private business.
Anger and hate is eating people alive and the country is going to pay a steep price for it. We did for eight years under Bush/Cheney and that is going to look like a cakewalk compared to this disaster!
3
You will be happy to learn that many working class whites who you hate so much are now killing themselves. Be thankful!
2
1. 20 Million for speeches, $ 675,000 for 3 talks to big banks.
2. Running the State Dept from her home in Westchester, server and all.
3. Using the DNC to trample all over Bernie Sanders in the primaries.
4. The highly suspicious Clinton Foundation.
5. Bill gets on a plane with AG Lynch.
6. Bill calls ACA crazy
7. H vows to kill the coal industry.
8. H runs an endless stream of negative ads.
9. Repeatedly comes to NC, ignoring the Rust Belt.
10. John Pedesta.
2. Running the State Dept from her home in Westchester, server and all.
3. Using the DNC to trample all over Bernie Sanders in the primaries.
4. The highly suspicious Clinton Foundation.
5. Bill gets on a plane with AG Lynch.
6. Bill calls ACA crazy
7. H vows to kill the coal industry.
8. H runs an endless stream of negative ads.
9. Repeatedly comes to NC, ignoring the Rust Belt.
10. John Pedesta.
4
"Democrats have to figure out why the white working class just voted overwhelmingly against its own economic interests, not pretend that a bit more populism would solve the problem."
1. White working class didn't like the candidate foisted on them by the Democratic elite, including you, Mr. Krugman.
2. Democratic message seemed to focus on gender politics more on economic change...and her references to economic change were always general and wonkish not direct and visceral.
3. Yes, the media failed. You should be included in that failure.
1. White working class didn't like the candidate foisted on them by the Democratic elite, including you, Mr. Krugman.
2. Democratic message seemed to focus on gender politics more on economic change...and her references to economic change were always general and wonkish not direct and visceral.
3. Yes, the media failed. You should be included in that failure.
9
Over this holiday I came to wish that Bernie Sanders would come and live here in Indiana. I noticed the TV ads he ran here briefly in the spring resonated with the poor 'deplorables' that voted out all reason in this state. The press is responsible for the state of this nation. That FB and Twitter are not being held accountable for the damage inflicted on the TRUTH is dismaying. It seems Pandora's box is now open and the demon has free rein to do as it pleases. Social media want to be 'news orgs' they need to exert some editorial control or at least add disclaimers to what is spurious or unsourced reporting. What we have now is not so much free speech or truth tell but screaming loudly and alarmingly till a 'THING idea" has traction. There seems to be an algorithm of thought control out 'there' and it is working. A new sort of Propaganda that is scary effective. Get to Work old grey ladies of the written press.
1
"Imagined liberal disdain"??? If there's ever a quote that shows Krugman is so elitist that he has no clue how people respond to being told they are idiots etc, this encapsulates it perfectly. If liberals can't see how they are showing real disdain, they will end up dealing with many more conservative leaders in the future.
8
The answer is simple. The Democrats have no one who can talk to these people as one of them - their language, talk with them, not at them or down to them. FDR, although an elite, was able to communicate with them. I think he gained this ability by intermingling with ordinary folks at Warm Springs trying to lick polio. Bill Clinton had this ability, Hillary Clinton did not.
4
Paul,
You don't need to multiply by -1 everything Bernie says. Your exhibit A: "The Democrats defend the environment, blacks, women, gays, lesbians, etc. Who defends white men? I, Trump!" Isn't that identity politics? Does it not work well? Bernie didn't say it doesn't work well for Trump. The question is, does it work well for working people. It is this political trap that Bernie is telling us to avoid. Deactivate identity politics! Reach out to white working people in the states that neoliberalism destroyed. Their interests are not fundamentally different from those of all other workers, the 99%. It's not "a bit more populism." It is just reasonable.
You don't need to multiply by -1 everything Bernie says. Your exhibit A: "The Democrats defend the environment, blacks, women, gays, lesbians, etc. Who defends white men? I, Trump!" Isn't that identity politics? Does it not work well? Bernie didn't say it doesn't work well for Trump. The question is, does it work well for working people. It is this political trap that Bernie is telling us to avoid. Deactivate identity politics! Reach out to white working people in the states that neoliberalism destroyed. Their interests are not fundamentally different from those of all other workers, the 99%. It's not "a bit more populism." It is just reasonable.
6
Clueless.
That is the only way to characterize yet another pedantic column from Krugman, the practitioner of one non-science (economics) who continues to pontificate on a non-science field he is even less expert in (political science).
Just consider an issue not touched on by Krugman: transgender bathrooms.
The issue of transgender bathrooms exploded in 2016 and typified for millions of Americans a liberal elite cramming a divisive identity issue down the throats of the many for the benefit of a few. Irrespective of the good or bad intentions surrounding transgender bathrooms, the feelings of millions were blithely ignored for the good of an extremely small, yet vocal, minority. And let me tell you, this issue resonated even here in NYC.
So, when you have a presidential election that is simply either-or and you have a candidate of the status quo elite who you feel is out of touch with your beliefs, feelings, fears or whatever, the alternative becomes the other less damaged candidate.
That is the only way to characterize yet another pedantic column from Krugman, the practitioner of one non-science (economics) who continues to pontificate on a non-science field he is even less expert in (political science).
Just consider an issue not touched on by Krugman: transgender bathrooms.
The issue of transgender bathrooms exploded in 2016 and typified for millions of Americans a liberal elite cramming a divisive identity issue down the throats of the many for the benefit of a few. Irrespective of the good or bad intentions surrounding transgender bathrooms, the feelings of millions were blithely ignored for the good of an extremely small, yet vocal, minority. And let me tell you, this issue resonated even here in NYC.
So, when you have a presidential election that is simply either-or and you have a candidate of the status quo elite who you feel is out of touch with your beliefs, feelings, fears or whatever, the alternative becomes the other less damaged candidate.
7
The unknown for me is how Obama won the rust belt but Hiliary didnt.
But in the end as dangerous as Trump is and despite Fox news, I take heart in Lincoln's You can fool all of the people some of the time, and some of the people all the time, but you cannot fool all of the people all of the time.
This translated into Obama victories in 2008 and 2012 and will end it for Trump if his actions are as bad as Dr. K predicts they will be.
But in the end as dangerous as Trump is and despite Fox news, I take heart in Lincoln's You can fool all of the people some of the time, and some of the people all the time, but you cannot fool all of the people all of the time.
This translated into Obama victories in 2008 and 2012 and will end it for Trump if his actions are as bad as Dr. K predicts they will be.
1
I think it is hard for the well-informed readers of the Times to fathom how little many Trump voters understand about what their vote wins them. On election night I kept thinking about the look on face of the heroine at the end of the movie "The Story of Qiu Ju". It is a story of a Chinese peasant who tries to use a legal system she barely understands to extract an apology from a village chief who has wronged her. After tremendous effort she wins her case---and only then realized how different the prize she won is from what she actually wanted. See the look on her face (and a longer synopsis) here: http://alchetron.com/The-Story-of-Qiu-Ju-27880-W.
I wrote a satiric fantasy that envisions an arrangement that might better match what voters actually wanted to win: http://medium.com/@rfrankel/the-presidents-apprentice-d43346886730
I wrote a satiric fantasy that envisions an arrangement that might better match what voters actually wanted to win: http://medium.com/@rfrankel/the-presidents-apprentice-d43346886730
Obama made a great point about things candidates can do to cut their margins of loss in inhospitable areas. The big one is "show up and listen." Sec. Clinton didn't do that--not only in Kentucky, where she wouldn't have won anyway, but in the regions of those Midwestern states she wrongly believed to be in the bag.
Trump lied to those people, and his/Ryan's policies will hurt them the most. But at least he spoke to them. We can't ever not do that again.
Trump lied to those people, and his/Ryan's policies will hurt them the most. But at least he spoke to them. We can't ever not do that again.
25
I agree with everything said in "The Populism Perplex", but we need to go on to the next step: what is to be done? A progressive Democratic party must address the white working class repeatedly, directly, programmatically. If the media won't cover it, give them something to make them cover it. Obama and Hillary and Bernie should have done tour after tour of the red states and the left-behind areas of the blue states, and recruited local voices that can make some strong rhetorically effective argument that jibes with Krugman's analysis: white working people, you have been sold a bill of goods by a party that is using you, cares nothing about your real condition. But that would have to be backed by strong policy recommendations, real investment in those areas, infrastructure projects, housing and so on, as well as a full-throated program to rein in corporate capital and the finance sector and to reverse the growth in income inequality
Ever since the day after the election there's been a mad rush not to talk about gender when it comes to HRC's electoral college defeat. Instead, we read about 'identity politics' over and over again. Will no one drill down into the specifics of gender? Is it really so threatening? Yes, I believe it is. Call yourself a feminist and watch for a stiffening, a tenseness all around you. Talking about gender will make a person into a dissident. 4,000 years of civilization means 4,000 years of sexism. Nothing will ever change until we start to find words for why women continue to be considered "other" as opposed to being simply one half of the human species.
3
I am deeply disturbed by the Republican lie that liberals look down their noses at rural, blue collar or less educated white people. Although it may seem that way from comments posted on line, I think this is more out of a sense of frustration of liberals in being falsely accused of ignoring the interests of workers. Nothing could be further from the truth. We have supported workers' rights, unions, Medicare, Social Security, raising the minimum wage, improved access to healthcare for all, consumer protection against the abuses of Wall Street banks, improvements in public education and lowering the cost of a college education, among many other positions that promote the interests of all Americans.
Of course many of us feel frustrated by the rejection of our candidates by working class voters in favor of Republicans who have opposed every single one of the positions listed above we liberals have fought for. But I don't blame the victims of Republican lies and distortions. My anger is focused on the politicians who have done the lying, effective as it may have been. We must continue to advocate for the 99% by telling the truth, just much more effectively than we have.
Of course many of us feel frustrated by the rejection of our candidates by working class voters in favor of Republicans who have opposed every single one of the positions listed above we liberals have fought for. But I don't blame the victims of Republican lies and distortions. My anger is focused on the politicians who have done the lying, effective as it may have been. We must continue to advocate for the 99% by telling the truth, just much more effectively than we have.
3
There is nothing new about white, less educated workers voting against their economic self interest. See "What's the Matter With Kansas". Democratic policies have always favored the lower income groups while the GOP platform would cut taxes for the wealthiest. Witness Obamacare, which has been rejected in the Southern and Midwestern states most affected by economic hardship. Indeed, Trump ran on a promise to abolish it. Trying to make rational appeals to the "disaffected" is a losing game. Demagoguery always trumps reason among the less educated.
1
Populism is a sales technique. A populist first grabs the attention of the masses by speaking passionately to their common concerns. It is beyond intellectual appeal. It taps emotions. Once the speaker has their attention, he/she can channel the energy and direct it to whatever the speaker is selling. A benevolent populist will direct it to something uplifting, or, conversely, a malevolent populist will direct it to the dark side.
What Bernie is saying, that Dr. Krugman is not grasping, is that Democratic voters have to be inspired to turn out in the numbers needed to win elections. That inspiration is what propelled Obama to victory twice. Intellectual appeal alone is not sufficient, unfortunately. If it was, the Democrats, who have a much better policy platform, would be blowing away their Republican opponents on every level of government.
Democrats have a strong hopeful message. So much so, that the message and platform sell themselves on an intellectual level. But to consistently win, Democratic candidates need to sell these policies to the masses. Populism is a well-proven technique for doing just that.
What Bernie is saying, that Dr. Krugman is not grasping, is that Democratic voters have to be inspired to turn out in the numbers needed to win elections. That inspiration is what propelled Obama to victory twice. Intellectual appeal alone is not sufficient, unfortunately. If it was, the Democrats, who have a much better policy platform, would be blowing away their Republican opponents on every level of government.
Democrats have a strong hopeful message. So much so, that the message and platform sell themselves on an intellectual level. But to consistently win, Democratic candidates need to sell these policies to the masses. Populism is a well-proven technique for doing just that.
1
In the first place, it wasn't or necessarily prominently non-college educated whites who put Trump in. There was also, according to one report, college educated middle manager types who voted him in. True, the ACA was for them and greatly improved their lives in that respect. Their concerns were elsewhere. These are people who are greatly insecure about their future in the key populations areas that voted Trump. They never recovered sufficiently from the 2008 economic disaster, and both group's concerns, fears, and frustrations have been ignored by both parties, both Republicans and Democrats while the focus of policy has been on the financial economy--the ACA excepting--not the real economy in which most people in this country must struggle. Along comes Trump, the outsider, and these key voting blocks jump at the chance for change.
True, they desperately want action now on their behalf and Trump has no chance of helping them. He has no idea how to do so. Nobody does.
But, well, I have an idea. We need a national job market set up online that would have the effect of flipping the power structure between employer and job-seeker. You're good at your job. You go online and find 50 employers willing to vie for your services.
True, this is most ideal for the young without families to move, but it would also go a long way to take the bite out of recession. There is probably a good job for everyone somewhere in the country if you a willing or forced to move. (Continued below)
True, they desperately want action now on their behalf and Trump has no chance of helping them. He has no idea how to do so. Nobody does.
But, well, I have an idea. We need a national job market set up online that would have the effect of flipping the power structure between employer and job-seeker. You're good at your job. You go online and find 50 employers willing to vie for your services.
True, this is most ideal for the young without families to move, but it would also go a long way to take the bite out of recession. There is probably a good job for everyone somewhere in the country if you a willing or forced to move. (Continued below)
(Continued from above) And, recessions can force at least the bread-winner to have to move at least temporarily to where the job is.
A truly effective national job market set up online would change the country, economically, socially, culturally, politically. It would transform capitalism by empowering employees. So much so that employers would not doubt start universally to demand employment agreements to stay put and not jump ship for a length of time.
It takes a little vision, but imaging the freedom for the young and especially the security for critically vulnerable families at risk of losing their home for not having a job.
A truly effective national job market set up online would change the country, economically, socially, culturally, politically. It would transform capitalism by empowering employees. So much so that employers would not doubt start universally to demand employment agreements to stay put and not jump ship for a length of time.
It takes a little vision, but imaging the freedom for the young and especially the security for critically vulnerable families at risk of losing their home for not having a job.
White working class woes are largely manufactured, a product of the right wing outrage bubble that has been running nonstop since the 1990's. The right wing info-tainment machine has poisoned the minds of a large portion of our country, and radicalized them against democrats and progressive ideals--truly an American version of ISIS. Sadly, these people are now conditioned to reflexively reject ideas and leaders that actually benefit their interests.
If they turned off Fox News long enough to actually reflect on how fortunate they were, they would probably come to different conclusions about their lives.
If they turned off Fox News long enough to actually reflect on how fortunate they were, they would probably come to different conclusions about their lives.
1
Posting from LA, or maybe Beverly Hills, or Pacific Palisades... And exactly who do YOU know about the lives of people living paycheck to paycheck in the rust belt? What do YOU know about what life is like on less than 1k a month anywhere in the US? Post when you personally experience what millions of Americans are going through.
2
That's right. Let them eat cake.
Paul,I agree 100% with your column but I would add to this issue the strength of the 2nd amendment in rural America.I can imagine thru out the entire "Rust Belt" the continual barrage of how Hillary will take away your guns. Also, add the political ads stating the Bill Clinton was the author of NFTA. The misleading ads of bringing back jobs,2nd amendment lies and NAFTA did Hillary great harm and without an issue oriented press ,democracy is in deep trouble.
4
Let me offer a few facts to Mr. Baumann. Hillary did endorse confiscation of guns ala' Australia and did threaten the existence of the NRA. Slick Willie and Hillary both promoted NAFTA and he signed it into law as he did with the elimination of Glass-Steagall, which set the stage for the 2008 meltdown.
3
Paul writes: "I don’t know why imagined liberal disdain . . ." Protip: it's not imagined. Liberals condescend to the working class on a daily basis, and liberals called white Trump voters racists.
Paul writes: "the white working class just voted overwhelmingly against its own economic interests." Protip: this is a prime example of liberal condescension. Moreover, Paul and other liberals just cannot comprehend that Trump voters were concerned about social issues generally and the SCOTUS in particular.
Paul writes: "the white working class just voted overwhelmingly against its own economic interests." Protip: this is a prime example of liberal condescension. Moreover, Paul and other liberals just cannot comprehend that Trump voters were concerned about social issues generally and the SCOTUS in particular.
3
Mr. Brooks is exactly right this time. People have been voting against their economic interest for years, and what is there to do about this when so many people's only source of news is talk radio and social media. Republican policies have done much more harm to the white working class than anything contemplated by the Democrats, yet the Republicans have convinced the white, exurban voter that somehow they will be their saviors. It makes no sense, and I'm not sure how you combat this. Certainly, talking seriously about policy change has not helped.
2
It's the defeatist attitude that "it doesn't matter so let's not even try" that loses elections for Democrats.
2
How about Democrats putting the campaign headquarters in Detroit instead of Brooklyn. Legalize Weed and use the Sin Tax for Free College .
2
Trump held a mirror up to America and sorry you may not like it but the people who vote can easily be fooled. Good luck explaining that coal jobs are not coming back because coal plants no longer make economical sense.
You think for a second Republicans in Texas, Oklahoma, Louisiana where nat gas/oil are king will let coal come back and threaten jobs in their states? You think Republicans in Wyoming are going to be cool with Republicans in West Virginia takes jobs from their states?
Republicans are on a clock to deliver on these promises but if you think any state with such poor education will vote in their own interest then you are a fool.
You think for a second Republicans in Texas, Oklahoma, Louisiana where nat gas/oil are king will let coal come back and threaten jobs in their states? You think Republicans in Wyoming are going to be cool with Republicans in West Virginia takes jobs from their states?
Republicans are on a clock to deliver on these promises but if you think any state with such poor education will vote in their own interest then you are a fool.
1
How much (or little) time network news spent on the issues is beside the point.
We have a generation which gets there news from twitter and other social media. It's hard to fit a thoughtful discussion of an issue into one of your generally excellent op-ed pieces. The number of people who read longer in- depth news articles is not enough to swing an election.
Elections have always been as much about slogans as the underlying policy. Obama understood this, which is how he got elected.
We have a generation which gets there news from twitter and other social media. It's hard to fit a thoughtful discussion of an issue into one of your generally excellent op-ed pieces. The number of people who read longer in- depth news articles is not enough to swing an election.
Elections have always been as much about slogans as the underlying policy. Obama understood this, which is how he got elected.
"she would probably be president-elect if the director of the F.B.I. hadn’t laid such a heavy thumb on the scales". does Professor Krugman use the same crystal ball to make p;olitical predictions as he does economic predictions? or does he just wing it and make up whatever predictions best fit his progressive views. i suspect that the latter is the case.
4
Richard has nailed it. Dr. Krugman's latest prediction of the markets crashing and never returning was his latest bit of flawed commentary and a beauty!
1
This is a shockingly disingenuous piece by a guy I used to respect, until he became such a relentless shill for Hillary and her Goldman owner-operators that he came to seem like the absurd careerist hero of Joseph Heller's wonderful satire Good as Gold. Even Joe Scarborough now admits Bernie would have wiped the floor with Trump, if the Black Political Machine, and it alone, allowed Hillary to defeat Bernie in the primaries by smearing him with the lie he cared less about blacks than Hillary. Forget the myth that Republicans would have smeared Bernie as a "socialist." Bernie would have won every Hillary voters, out of terror of Trump. Add many, many millions of Rust Belt black and white millennials. Then add the very chunk of white Trump voters Krugman focuses on here, the ones who told exit pollsters they would have voted for Sanders instead of Trump, and Sanders wins in a landslide. Bernie had it all figured out; it's just that Wall St. and neoliberals didn't want his policies, and lost.
5
Once again I invoke "keizar socce"'s parting shot- the greatest trick the Devil every pulled off was convincing the world he did not exist.
Where was the 1% in this talk. Well, it OWNS MSM so we diddled about emails and "character", as is in cartoon buffoon. Funny. Bernie says uniting everyone against them works. It was what worked fro Obama, of course in 08 the 1% could hardly disappear...
& Obama hardly needed to work muchd to get minority votes. More a hard sell for a rich, older white woman. Her strident efforts to rally on the basis of skin tone, language and gender left little question as to who "the enemy" was... and the dog whistles were heard by that almost absolute Majority...
That....along with strategic error in not parsing the campaign as one needing to defensively fight to hold the 08/12 "blue" states was the whole sheebang.
short and suite- Bernie is correct. The Dems have gotten by to long mouthing lip service on class divides, while catering to the same 1% bosses as the Gop. That inauthenticity was the seed of this catastrophe, period
Where was the 1% in this talk. Well, it OWNS MSM so we diddled about emails and "character", as is in cartoon buffoon. Funny. Bernie says uniting everyone against them works. It was what worked fro Obama, of course in 08 the 1% could hardly disappear...
& Obama hardly needed to work muchd to get minority votes. More a hard sell for a rich, older white woman. Her strident efforts to rally on the basis of skin tone, language and gender left little question as to who "the enemy" was... and the dog whistles were heard by that almost absolute Majority...
That....along with strategic error in not parsing the campaign as one needing to defensively fight to hold the 08/12 "blue" states was the whole sheebang.
short and suite- Bernie is correct. The Dems have gotten by to long mouthing lip service on class divides, while catering to the same 1% bosses as the Gop. That inauthenticity was the seed of this catastrophe, period
4
To the NY Times Editors: Please restrict Prof. Krugman to subject matters that he knows something about, such as international monetary policy, econometrics, and the New Jersey Tunnel.
His political insights are becoming excuses for his mistakes in political judgments.
His political insights are becoming excuses for his mistakes in political judgments.
5
Democrats have neither the money nor a national plan as the Republicans have had for twenty-five years. An outside national catastrophe might move ignorant voters to the left, but only the elimination of the Electoral College, which has now twice in less than twenty years allowed the Presidency to go to an unqualified candidate (being kind here) -- only its elimination will allow for the wisdom of the largest number of voters to work. What we have now is not a democracy.
1
The Trump experiment is dangerous indeed. But the known danger of 'politics and issues' as usual has proven to be just as dangerous. The left seems to have decided that they just need to woo the great middle class with more political promises. They'd be better advised to woo them with real expressions of concern. Trump may not be able to do anything, but he clearly wants to. The left meanwhile, gushes over issues like Sanctuary Cities, gun control, and the needs of the transgendered. It isn't about those policies as much as it is about ignoring the feelings of the majority in their pursuit.
2
Krugman is just too cerebral, analyzing and reasoning what the candidates said and then being baffled by how people voted. It's simple, people in coal country have been on a steady diet of misinformation and brainwashing from conservative talk radio. They believe Obama has regulated their jobs out of existence and that Obama and Clinton hate the coal industry and will do anything to shut it down in favor of clean energy. No amount of facts and reasoning will change the narrative they tell themselves. When the jobs don't come back, Trump will blame Democrats and environmentalists saying they made coal unprofitable.
6
I was just waiting for krugman to say the word "Bernie bro" again. He still hasn't learned the simple fact that people just hated Hillary Clinton. Not because she's a woman. Not because she's too good for the country. But because she was a truly awful candidate from day one. If people do not like you, they will not vote for you. It's as simple as that. The democrats should have ran someone else.
5
After reading many of the comments submitted and published, I would like to applaud the variety of problems and solutions to our current dilemma that Times readers offer.
Perhaps the editorialists of the Times will offer some syntheses and some wisdom. The nation needs an honest corporation serving the interests of its citizens.
Perhaps the editorialists of the Times will offer some syntheses and some wisdom. The nation needs an honest corporation serving the interests of its citizens.
1
Do NYT readers recognize these names--Rush Limbaugh and Sean Hannity? If you get your "news" and commentary from these sources, you would have voted for Trump too.
2
Americans don't vote on issues, they vote on personalities and sound bites.
The Dems, and their leading intellectuals like Dr. Krugman, obviously still have a lot of processing to do. First, it's time to stop blaming Comey and move on. The election is over, and Hillary didn't win. The argument about why she lost is a perfect reflection of arguments before the election, about why she was a terrible candidate and couldn't beat Trump. Second, the sudden upsurge of white racist voters is no such thing. These supposed "racists" and "misogynists" (i.e., anyone who didn't vote for HIllary) managed to elect Barack Obama twice. Maybe it was HIllary herself, and not the fact that she was a woman, that turned voters off. (I'm in this camp.) Third, stop the constant hand-wringing over stupid white people who don't vote in their own economic interests. Is this what America is about, pandering to people's self interest and expecting them to vote for you as a knee-jerk? Or did many people see that promises from the establishment never come true, and instead, every day the news is a drumbeat of "The First X to do Y" identity politics supposedly representing progress. Well, transgender bathrooms and universal gay marriage are nice, but they aren't the same as making America fair and giving everyone the chance at a decent job. When voters wanted a change, the Dems gave us HIllary and the R's gave us Trump. The nation was voting for change, not misogyny, not racism, not Conservatism, not liberalism. Bernie is right!
5
Paul, the country is more than just the New York bankers and the California Hollywood elites. Bernie got that, but Hillary did not. Hillary was an awful candidate, mired in the appearance of impropriety and her emails lies and the Clinton Foundation corruption. Frankly, the fact that a populist huckster could beat her is a testament to how miserable a candidate you were pushing.
Just as Bernie could have beat Trump by appealing to workers, imagine how a reasonably honest and decent Republican candidate (Kasich) might have fared against Hillary. It might have been a landslide for the Republican. The Democrats fielded a candidate mired so deep in the appearance of impropriety, in lies and apparent corruption, that all of your trashing of Trump could not save her from her own mud. But it was people like you who chose to focus on the mud instead of policy. By slinging all of your trash at Trump, you encouraged people to focus on Hillary's ethical problems. Maybe you should have talked policy instead of trash.
Once upon a time people talked about folks who did not have a college degree as people of common sense. But now you look down at people without college degrees. Of course, you only look down at white people without college degrees. You would never look down at black people without college degrees. Or Latinos without college degrees. Looks like you are being a little racist Paul. People resent that. Just saying.
Just as Bernie could have beat Trump by appealing to workers, imagine how a reasonably honest and decent Republican candidate (Kasich) might have fared against Hillary. It might have been a landslide for the Republican. The Democrats fielded a candidate mired so deep in the appearance of impropriety, in lies and apparent corruption, that all of your trashing of Trump could not save her from her own mud. But it was people like you who chose to focus on the mud instead of policy. By slinging all of your trash at Trump, you encouraged people to focus on Hillary's ethical problems. Maybe you should have talked policy instead of trash.
Once upon a time people talked about folks who did not have a college degree as people of common sense. But now you look down at people without college degrees. Of course, you only look down at white people without college degrees. You would never look down at black people without college degrees. Or Latinos without college degrees. Looks like you are being a little racist Paul. People resent that. Just saying.
5
You identified the problems: "favoritism toward nonwhites," and "elites looking down on them." But then you said that can't really be the reason, that's only how they see things. This sort of it-can't-be-true viewpoint is blocking you from seeing the answers you've already identified in you heart of hearts.
2
Paul Krugman admits he still doesn't understand why Hillary lost this election and then refuses to listen to anyone else's explanation.
Here's a simple one: former Obama voters chose Trump this time around because they see that the Democratic party has abandoned them in favor of Wall Street and the professional classes. Hillary, the candidate of the Democratic establishment, including Dr. Krugman, not only ran on more of the same, she was directly associated with this neo-liberal program's worst excesses and personally enriched, vastly so, by that program's corporate beneficiaries. Obamacare and appeals to identify politics are not going to save this lovely program of the 1% from voter wrath.
Thomas Frank has been explaining Democratic electoral failures for years now. Is it that Dr. Krugman can't find Frank's books or that he simply doesn't want to hear it?
Here's a simple one: former Obama voters chose Trump this time around because they see that the Democratic party has abandoned them in favor of Wall Street and the professional classes. Hillary, the candidate of the Democratic establishment, including Dr. Krugman, not only ran on more of the same, she was directly associated with this neo-liberal program's worst excesses and personally enriched, vastly so, by that program's corporate beneficiaries. Obamacare and appeals to identify politics are not going to save this lovely program of the 1% from voter wrath.
Thomas Frank has been explaining Democratic electoral failures for years now. Is it that Dr. Krugman can't find Frank's books or that he simply doesn't want to hear it?
3
Paul Krugman:
Once again you're quoting Bernie Sanders and then trying to assure yourself that his progressive ideas really wouldn't work. But deep down I think you have realized that you backed the wrong candidate in the primaries. And you were repeatedly and pleadingly and beseechingly warned by readers. A profound disappointment and lapse. And that is no little mistake for you, the so-called "conscience of a liberal".
Didn't you, Paul, leave out three important letters in that description? Neo- as in neoliberal? Yes, the counterpoint to neocon, like Paul Wolfowitz of Iraq debacle fame.
You have lost the following of many readers at the NYTimes (myself included). A profound disappointment and lapse indeed.
Once again you're quoting Bernie Sanders and then trying to assure yourself that his progressive ideas really wouldn't work. But deep down I think you have realized that you backed the wrong candidate in the primaries. And you were repeatedly and pleadingly and beseechingly warned by readers. A profound disappointment and lapse. And that is no little mistake for you, the so-called "conscience of a liberal".
Didn't you, Paul, leave out three important letters in that description? Neo- as in neoliberal? Yes, the counterpoint to neocon, like Paul Wolfowitz of Iraq debacle fame.
You have lost the following of many readers at the NYTimes (myself included). A profound disappointment and lapse indeed.
4
I live in a deep red state, my vote hasn't counted for years, I keep voting but it doesn't matter. 51% of eligible voters stayed home, that is the problem, how do you get them to vote? Eliminating the Electoral College I believe would be a start, allow my votes and many others to count again.
4
"Hillary Clinton won the popular vote by more than two million..."
Sure, Paul, but those votes aren't in the states she lost, so quit whining. If you are so convinced the popular vote winner should be President, dedicate one of your columns to it.
"To be honest, I don’t fully understand this resentment." The pundit class rarely does, Paul, especially when their side loses. Maybe instead of laying out your perfectly thought-out reasons why everyone should be a liberal, you should get out of your office and see how much of the country actually lives.
Sure, Paul, but those votes aren't in the states she lost, so quit whining. If you are so convinced the popular vote winner should be President, dedicate one of your columns to it.
"To be honest, I don’t fully understand this resentment." The pundit class rarely does, Paul, especially when their side loses. Maybe instead of laying out your perfectly thought-out reasons why everyone should be a liberal, you should get out of your office and see how much of the country actually lives.
4
Well, of course Mr. Krugman doesn't understand the anger of working class whites in "fly over country". Mr. Krugman is an extremely wealthy, privileged coastal elitist, who probably has never even met a working class white person, let alone lived in a community that has been destroyed by free trade or decimated by violent crime. I urge all NYT readers to google images of Detroit, or another large midwestern city, including historical images, and try and imagine how you would feel if this was once your home town, a city your great grandparents helped build in the pre globalist era. Yes, I know, if one's great grandparents were of European extraction, they were by definition evil, and I know there is no room on these comment boards for empathy for working class white people, but I keep trying.
4
You have no idea what you are talking about. Why don't you try looking at the liberal, elite coasts to find farmers, people working in factories and small towns where people care about each other? But you are so blinded by conservative stereotypes that you have no clue. If you want someone to walk in your shoes, try taking the first step in theirs. I have no patience for people with your limited perspective throwing stones when you live in a glass house.
Since you are arguing about lies, please tell me exactly the racist smears that, according to you, Mr. Trump said. I do not recall a single racist comment. Mexicans are not a race. As a matter of fact, making them a single race is beyond racist. Mexico is a country of many races. Muslims are not a race either.
This is why many people have disdain for the left. RACIST! is given out like candy. If you are going to use labels, at least do an effort to use them correctly. Is Trump illegal-alien-ist? Islamist fear-ist? Fair enough. Since you have been able to come up with a whole list of proper terms to use just for gender classification, maybe it is time to expand the list of insults to those who voted for Trump. You will have eight years to put it together. (And that would be Ouch-IST?)
This is why many people have disdain for the left. RACIST! is given out like candy. If you are going to use labels, at least do an effort to use them correctly. Is Trump illegal-alien-ist? Islamist fear-ist? Fair enough. Since you have been able to come up with a whole list of proper terms to use just for gender classification, maybe it is time to expand the list of insults to those who voted for Trump. You will have eight years to put it together. (And that would be Ouch-IST?)
3
Perhaps you forgot the bigotry part. The things you mention are examples of bigotry on the part of Trump. Please stop cherry-picking. Listening and understanding is a two-way street. You should try it. Call me tired of being labeled a liberal elite by people who actually went to liberal, elite schools like Donald Trump. I went to state universities. Why do you keep being fooled by these people and their fake outrage?
From the political party that supports termination of employees who speak in a politically incorrect manner! Krugman wouldn't know much about the white or black or brown working class. Please stop being part of the problem and support the remedy.
2
It is important not to despair, and not to abandon rational policies, principles, and appealing to people's better angels. Democrats may not have won the day, but they did win more votes and a closely divided congress. I would rather have lost running a positive campaign like Hillary's than an ugly one like Trump's.
What more can be done to win over the working class vote? I wonder if the place to start is fighting for unions. Unions seem to be in decline in the last decade. Unions seem to have been effective in the past explaining to its members which candidates truly represent their interests. Second, fighting against voter disenfranchisement makes a lot of sense. Many people were denied a vote due to new voter ID laws. Also, strong candidates matter. Hillary just did not seem to have the political skills to inspire people in the way her husband or Obama did. She was not a fresh enough face, and came with too much baggage, real or imagined. Finally, effective strategies need to be found to battle misinformation. Misinformation via social networks and "news" outlets like Fox News were a real problem this election. I would also encourage those feeling powerless to get involved, join or start an advocacy group. It is not enough to just cast a vote.
What more can be done to win over the working class vote? I wonder if the place to start is fighting for unions. Unions seem to be in decline in the last decade. Unions seem to have been effective in the past explaining to its members which candidates truly represent their interests. Second, fighting against voter disenfranchisement makes a lot of sense. Many people were denied a vote due to new voter ID laws. Also, strong candidates matter. Hillary just did not seem to have the political skills to inspire people in the way her husband or Obama did. She was not a fresh enough face, and came with too much baggage, real or imagined. Finally, effective strategies need to be found to battle misinformation. Misinformation via social networks and "news" outlets like Fox News were a real problem this election. I would also encourage those feeling powerless to get involved, join or start an advocacy group. It is not enough to just cast a vote.
1
PK doesn't address the loss of trust and confidence in our institutions as another feature of the resentment and anger in the working class wether white or black.e.g. no meaningful work, failing rural schools, racists urban police . As a white economically secure liberal i have confidence in and support government as a solution to societal problems even though voting for Hillary was against my economic self interest . The trump supporters I know in Pa and Me don't trust government and our institutions.They believed they are forgotten,looked down upon as "deplorable," and on their own until Trump came along. So Trump's with and for them" flipping the bird" at the establishment (e.g" its a rigged system, lock her up and drain the swamp") not their self interest economic or otherwise won their vote . I don't believe democrats coming up with effective policies put in place by government will win these folks over or heal our divided nation. I am not sure what will
1
Paul Krugman column today is very good. I feel the limits of space created a problem with the "Fracking" reference. I'll offer a view.
Fracking, regardless of opposing views on its use in oil and gas wells, has resulted in booming oil and gas production to the point that we effectively have had real energy independence for several years.
The production boom has also created a new reality, in particular power generation, given that Natural Gas is cheaper than coal, far better in terms of the environment and over time easier to transport.
Not to mention that design and construction of the power generating plants is much less involved and that there is no need for coal ash disposal. Coal is at its best in power plant operation that supply constant load. They are designed for that and they are less efficient above or below a specific range.
It is next to impossible to build either coal or nuclear power facilities outside those states where utility regulation boards can guarantee the return on investment.
Fracking has been used in the Oil and industry since at least the 1940s. What is different is the broader use of horizontal drilling.
Wells are driven down into the producing area, the laterals extending a mile or further before being Fracking.
Fracking, regardless of opposing views on its use in oil and gas wells, has resulted in booming oil and gas production to the point that we effectively have had real energy independence for several years.
The production boom has also created a new reality, in particular power generation, given that Natural Gas is cheaper than coal, far better in terms of the environment and over time easier to transport.
Not to mention that design and construction of the power generating plants is much less involved and that there is no need for coal ash disposal. Coal is at its best in power plant operation that supply constant load. They are designed for that and they are less efficient above or below a specific range.
It is next to impossible to build either coal or nuclear power facilities outside those states where utility regulation boards can guarantee the return on investment.
Fracking has been used in the Oil and industry since at least the 1940s. What is different is the broader use of horizontal drilling.
Wells are driven down into the producing area, the laterals extending a mile or further before being Fracking.
1
Unfortunately, I think it's going to take the catastrophic consequences of four years of Trump's military, fiscal, and trade policies to shake the current populist conservative crop. What I fear is an equally simplistic populist movement on the left hijacking the Democratic party.
We live in a complex world, with complex problems without simple solutions. We need practical people with practical, case-by-case solutions, not more and more ideology with simple recipes for success. Sometimes it's good to raise taxes; sometimes it's good to lower them. Sometimes it's good to borrow more; sometimes it's good to save more. Sometimes more regulation is good; sometimes, less. Saying "It depends" isn't a mark of intellectual weakness ... it's a mark of objective rationality.
We live in a complex world, with complex problems without simple solutions. We need practical people with practical, case-by-case solutions, not more and more ideology with simple recipes for success. Sometimes it's good to raise taxes; sometimes it's good to lower them. Sometimes it's good to borrow more; sometimes it's good to save more. Sometimes more regulation is good; sometimes, less. Saying "It depends" isn't a mark of intellectual weakness ... it's a mark of objective rationality.
5
What Krugman writes is accurate. So are the readers who mention misogyny, abortion, Comey, Fox News, and other factors to explain why so many Americans vote against their own interests and against politicians who try to help them.
Three hundred years from now a Chinese historian writing about the self-destruction of the American Republic will mention all of the above reasons. But he or she will focus on the primary cause: the American constitution. Except for endorsing slavery, it was a splendidly progressive political document for the late eighteenth century. But it is a retrogressive document for the twenty-first century. It is insane that both Wyoming and California have two senators. It encourages obstructionism. It provides no remedies for outrageous political gerrymandering. And there is more.
I wish that there was a way that it could be amended. But it will not happen. Hence, a minority of Americans will continue to destroy the American Republic. And the future Chinese historian will write its epitaph.
Three hundred years from now a Chinese historian writing about the self-destruction of the American Republic will mention all of the above reasons. But he or she will focus on the primary cause: the American constitution. Except for endorsing slavery, it was a splendidly progressive political document for the late eighteenth century. But it is a retrogressive document for the twenty-first century. It is insane that both Wyoming and California have two senators. It encourages obstructionism. It provides no remedies for outrageous political gerrymandering. And there is more.
I wish that there was a way that it could be amended. But it will not happen. Hence, a minority of Americans will continue to destroy the American Republic. And the future Chinese historian will write its epitaph.
5
Paul Krugman's basis to doubt Bernie Sanders is predicated, in part, by his own inability to acknowledge the possibility that just maybe the media is a completely owned tool of the corporate elite. Sanders knows that the messages favored by the big papers and the three networks will confound and confuse, particularly in an election year, but those facts don't undermine his criticism of identity politics.
Krugman likes to point out that the Democrats have done more for the white working class than have the Republicans, and that may be true, but it is still a kick in the gut when Democrats take care of their "friends" before the voters. Obamacare was an attempt at almost universal health coverage with no single-payer option and plenty of goodies for the insurance lobby which embraced it publicly, and since then lobbied to have it scrapped privately. In 2008, the economic collapse was "fixed" by addressing the excesses and reckless behavior of Wall St investors, and they were verbally scolded about the exorbitant bonuses that were distributed after billions of tax-payer dollars were spent to make them whole. Nobody went to jail, perhaps because that Wall St. lobby had given big money to put President Obama in the White House. Folks across the country suffered foreclosures at the hands of banks with no monies to help bail them out. This from a Democratic Administration. When Democrats take care of their donors first, their policies are well understood.
Krugman likes to point out that the Democrats have done more for the white working class than have the Republicans, and that may be true, but it is still a kick in the gut when Democrats take care of their "friends" before the voters. Obamacare was an attempt at almost universal health coverage with no single-payer option and plenty of goodies for the insurance lobby which embraced it publicly, and since then lobbied to have it scrapped privately. In 2008, the economic collapse was "fixed" by addressing the excesses and reckless behavior of Wall St investors, and they were verbally scolded about the exorbitant bonuses that were distributed after billions of tax-payer dollars were spent to make them whole. Nobody went to jail, perhaps because that Wall St. lobby had given big money to put President Obama in the White House. Folks across the country suffered foreclosures at the hands of banks with no monies to help bail them out. This from a Democratic Administration. When Democrats take care of their donors first, their policies are well understood.
5
The economy and jobs issues are just a smoke screen for these Trump supporters. They all have been convinced that they should fear people of color and certain religions and immigrants in general - which Trump exploited to the max. Of course they have been told that their jobs have been threatened by these people that they should fer. But the underlying reason these people irrationally supported Trump and the Republican party is fear and bigotry.
Unfortunately for the Democratic Party, they are identified as being the protectors of people of color and immigrants. It is going to be a difficult task for the Democrats to convince these people that there it is not a "them vs. us" world and that all people can benefit from progressive government and policies.
Unfortunately for the Democratic Party, they are identified as being the protectors of people of color and immigrants. It is going to be a difficult task for the Democrats to convince these people that there it is not a "them vs. us" world and that all people can benefit from progressive government and policies.
2
But you can keep telling yourself it was all Comey's fault if that makes you feel better, Professor.