Tomorrow is the tenth anniversary of the collapse of 2008 and things are much, much worse




Say we define roughly half the electorate as racist. How is that helpful? Do you think that’s a persuasive stance, or an alienating one? A majority of those people would reject and resent that categorization. Almost no one considers themselves racist, even if they objectively are.

In any case, if you define “voting your interests” as inherently racist because those interests don’t neatly fit whatever social justice narrative you prefer, then you have very little chance of charming anyone into electing your candidates.

I didn’t and wouldn’t vote for him or support his policies. But even so I’d likely be considered a racist by some, maybe even you, for not conforming to a standard of purity very few could.


And sexist. Let’s please not forget sexist.


I never trust an absolute certainty. They are usually more about what one wants to be true than they are about any external phenomena, and they’re easy for one’s enemies to exploit.


If their [the racist 48%] sense of moral justice is so miniscule, we are better off without their “support”. MLK rightly pointed out that the most insiduous and dangerous enemy is the white moderate. Wypipo, man.




Some rich people did.

And he’s far from the only one.

But, of course, a lot of rich people instead spent money to get Hillary Clinton elected. And plenty of them continued their usual practice of bipartisan bribery of both parties.

Yeah, public anger at financial/power elites also played a role.

On the fascist side, that anger is diverted into hatred of the other. On the non-fascist side, that anger explains the lack of support for the existing political alternative.

Neither major party represents the American people; they represent the competing factions (fascist vs neoliberal) of the US plutocracy. And their major differences lie in disputes over exactly how to screw the poor.


I consider it an absolute because there isn’t a way to support him that doesn’t involve being okay with some of his absurdly racist actions.


It appears that thousands of black women voted for Trump. Interestingly, it also appears that about twice as many college educated black women as non-college educated black women voted for him, suggesting a strong correlation with social class.

But all that’s based on exit poll data so it’s not reliable in detail - all we can reasonably infer is that many thousands of non-white Americans voted for Trump. It’s reasonably certain that this is so.

It’s easier for me to imagine non-racists voting for Trump - after all, I personally know a fair number of people who fit that description - than it is for me to swallow a “thousands of black people are actually Uncle Ruckus” type of explanation.


They don’t need to be Uncle Ruckus types, just willing to vote for someone who calls for exclusion based on religion and who began his campaign with ethnic stereotyping. If they can overlook setting public policy based on race and religion, then I will absolutely lump them in as racist. More college educated women voting for him (I strongly question the twice as many and would love to see a credible stat) wouldn’t indicate economic insecurity as likely answer given that people with a degree tend to be more economically secure than those without. That would work against the economic insecurity argument.


Since it’s all exit poll data, there aren’t any stats that are universally recognized as credible. :frowning: But you can find breakdowns of the exit polls at CNN and Nate Silver’s site has many articles about possible interpretations of them.

As a thought experiment, to see if I’m understanding your position correctly:

Suppose you have a choice between two candidates.

Candidate #1 is openly a horrible racist sexist bigot, but you believe she will NOT kill you or your family.

Candidate #2 is not openly racist, sexist, or bigoted, but you believe his election will result in nuclear war that will end all human life in North America and Europe.

If you vote for #1, are you a racist?

(Please understand I am not claiming that this was or wasn’t the actual choice presented. I’m just trying to make sure I understand your viewpoint through this thought experiment based on what I know about certain Trump voters. That’s why I highlighted the word suppose.)


I’d be willing to cede that there are people so far out of touch with reality that judging them on a racist /nonracist binary isn’t useful.


There are definitely other binaries at work and delusional/reality-based is one of them.*

(* not just for black folks, apparently)


I think that is really a very good way to describe the non-racist Trump voters I know.

Many of them can be enlightened, though - they can be reached, they can be brought back to reality. It’s just very hard when they are being fed misinformation 24/7 and being demonized as racists. But it can be done, and I think it must be done, if we aren’t going to have a second Trump term in office. I don’t want him impeached and Pence taking his place, I want to see the 2020 election end in a crushing defeat for Donald Trump, utterly discrediting Trumpism and unifying the nation behind a new leader in a way that impeachment simply cannot.


I came to the conclusion a long time ago that there is no use having me be one of the people convincing the small portion of the voters who fit that bill. I don’t have the patience left. I’ll dedicate my energies to the people where I’m starting from zero and who while apathetic or distrustful aren’t unhinged.


My standard for purity isn’t particularly high, but it does extend to not stripping people of their rights because of religion or ethnicity or voting for people who promise to do that. I find his tax and trade policies distasteful. I think his stated desire to ban Muslim immigration entirely disqualifies him or his supporters from any respect. Yes it is alienating. So is saying that any behavior is wrong. I’m willing to alienate a few people when they consider the humanity of a group of people a negotiable political talking point.


I think it’s useful to distinguish voters from supporters. Anyone who still supports him may well deserve all the scorn and abuse you’ve offered here. But the same shouldn’t be true of all those who voted for him. Many of them, having seen the results, are reachable. Painting them with the same brush is counterproductive.


This topic was automatically closed after 5 days. New replies are no longer allowed.